Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 400,000.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

A. The complaint of this case was filed by the representative of the copyright holder of the “F” and “H” program (hereinafter “each program of this case”) as stated in the facts charged. In such a case, in order to find that a legitimate complaint was filed, data proving the facts constituting the crime of the copyright holder, who is the right holder of the right to file a complaint, and the awareness of the offender should be submitted.

However, since the complaint of this case was not submitted with such data, the complaint of this case is unlawful.

B. The Defendant asserted that each of the instant programs is not an element of a violation of the Copyright Act. The Defendant received from the copyright holders of each of the instant programs the result of the interpretation of the research task from each of the universities permitted to use the program, and thus reproduced each of the instant programs delivered for confirmation of that result. This constitutes a temporary reproduction permitted by the person permitted to use the copyrighted works, within the scope of the method and conditions of exploitation (Article 46(2) of the Copyright Act), or a temporary reproduction permitted for use of the copyrighted works (Article 35-2 of the Copyright Act).

In addition, since H program stored only the installation file and did not actually install it, it cannot be deemed that there was an infringement of copyright.

C. The Defendant alleged that each of the instant programs constitutes legal errors under Article 16 of the Criminal Act was aware that each of the universities, which delivered research outcomes to the Defendant, obtained the legitimate right to use each of the instant programs. In order to verify the outcome of the interpretation of the research task, the use of each of the instant programs provided together is not allowed.