beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.12.14 2017노768

저작권법위반

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. “Public” under Article 137(1)1 of the Copyright Act refers only to a case where a work is first published or published in the public for the first time. Thus, not a book published for the first time, but a false indication of an author already published and re-issued does not constitute “public notice”.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (the penalty amounting to KRW 10 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Article 137(1)1 of the Copyright Act provides that a person, other than an author, who makes a work public under the real name or pseudonym of a person who is not the author, shall be subject to criminal punishment.

The purpose of the above provision is to protect the credibility of the society relating to the name of the author as well as the real right of the author, which is expressed as the author by a person other than the author on his own work against his own will and against the person other than the author's own will.

Meanwhile, publication under the Copyright Act refers to disclosing copyrighted works to the public by means of public performance, transmission to the public, exhibition, or other means (Article 2 Subparag. 25 of the Copyright Act). In light of the literal meaning of such publication and the legislative intent of Article 137(1)1 of the Copyright Act, even if a copyrighted work, which is the subject of false representation, is previously published, it does not affect the establishment of a crime under the said provision (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Do16031, Oct. 26, 2017). Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine cannot be accepted.

B. It is recognized that the Defendant, who made a judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing, led to the confession of and reflects the mistake, and the Defendant is the primary offender who had no previous criminal record.