logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.02.14 2016나2009146
손해배상(지)
Text

1. The judgment of the first instance, including the claims extended by this court, shall be modified as follows:

Defendant D.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s terrestrial broadcasting business is a public corporation established pursuant to the Broadcasting Act, and is a terrestrial broadcasting business operator licensed by the Korea Communications Commission. The Plaintiff is discharged from the Republic of Korea as its broadcast area. (2) The Plaintiff broadcast broadcast video works produced directly or by outsourcing (hereinafter “A video works”) via a transmission tower.

B. Defendants’ CATV broadcasting business type 1) The Defendants are CATV broadcasting business operators licensed for CATV broadcasting business by the Korea Communications Commission under the Broadcasting Act (hereinafter “SO”).

2) As a result, each of the areas indicated in the “broadcasting Area” column in Attachment 1 of the Cable Broadcasting Business Act as its broadcast area is selling digital cable broadcasting products to its subscribers, including terrestrial broadcasting signals sent by the Plaintiff to its broadcast area. 2) The Defendants, after receiving the Ainematographic Works sent to their broadcast area by the Plaintiff, simultaneously re-transmit their subscribers in real time without changing the program to the program through their cable networks.

(3) The Defendants sell and provide multi-channels for subscribers with multi-channels, and all goods include a channel for simultaneous re-transmission of terrestrial broadcasts as above. The adjacent channels operate a business by receiving commission from home shopping business operators because home shopping channels are organized. [Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute, and Gap evidence 1 through 3 (if a serial number is included; hereinafter the same shall apply) are included.

each entry, the purport of the whole pleading

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion holds not only the copyright of the program directly produced and the program produced by outsourcing, but also the program produced by outsourcing.

arrow