채무부존재확인
1. In relation to the infringement of the copyright of the software indicated in the separate sheet against the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant) by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a company that produces and sells digital broadcasting equipment, receivers, parts, etc., and the Defendant is a copyright holder of software in the attached list, which is used in the production of goods, the printing machine design, the structural interpretation, and the industrial design.
(Attachment List 2 “C” is a name before the change of “D” as stated in attached Table 1. (hereinafter referred to as “instant program”)
The Defendant concluded a license agreement with the instant program users, i.e., the license agreement. On June 15, 2016, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 20,200,000 per unit fee for the use of the instant program, including “E” and “F,” and received the license for the use of KRW 40,40,000.
C. However, the Plaintiff’s employees were issued a summary order of KRW 10,00,000 on May 14, 2018, with the fact that the instant program (D 6, H1) was reproduced from around September 2016 to May 2017 by using the instant program without permission, and the Plaintiff’s employees were issued a summary order of KRW 10,000,000 on the ground that “the employees committed a violation of the Copyright Act in relation to the Plaintiff’s business as above,” and the said summary order became final and conclusive around that time.
On January 9, 2018, the Plaintiff deposited 140,000,000 won with the Defendant and the cause of deposit as the compensation for damages arising from the copyright infringement at the Seoul Central District Court in 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Nos. 3, 4, Eul evidence 31, the absence of dispute, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff has obtained permission from the Defendant to use in KRW 20,200,000 per unit usage fee of KRW 20,200,000 as to the two of the Gracks actually used by the Plaintiff among the instant programs, and the H program is a Guber, so the user fee of the relevant racks does not exceed KRW 18,80,000.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff is a rupture.