The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. Facts charged;

A. Defendant A is a representative director B, a foundation corporation, who is engaged in the purchase and management of computer programs of the said foundation.

No person without a legitimate title shall use for business purposes a reproduction of another person’s program copyright by means of reproduction or transmission, or by infringing on another person’s copyright.

Nevertheless, on March 9, 2017, the Defendant installed m-OFICE2010 (Std) reproduction 9, Window 7, a copy of the victim microfICE 2010 (Std), 8 copies of the program work in Korean 2014, Adbebe Adbebe Cat 9, 2.x copy of the program work in Edbe C, a copy of the program work in Edbe C, a copy of Edbeat 9, a copy of the program work in Edbubat 2014, and a copy of Esp. 9.x copy in the corporate computer.

Accordingly, the defendant infringed the victims' copyright.

B. The Defendant Incorporated Foundation B was a corporation established for the purpose of environmental-related research and the development of basic environmental science and technology. The Defendant, the representative director of the Defendant, infringed the victims’ copyright regarding the Defendant’s business at the time and place specified in the foregoing paragraph A.

2. The facts charged against Defendant A constitute a crime under Article 136(2)4 and Article 124(1)3 of the Copyright Act, and Article 141, Article 136(2)4 and Article 124(1)3 of the same Act, and Article 124(1) of the same Act, and Article 141, Article 136(2)4 of the same Act, and Article 124(1) of the same Act. This is not punishable against the victim’s express intent pursuant to Article 140(1) of the same Act.

However, on December 15, 2017, after the prosecution of this case, the victim's agent expressed his intent not to punish the Defendants. Thus, all of the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.