The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the instant facts charged is the Defendant as a founder of “E” in Mapo-gu Seoul, Mapo-gu, Seoul on November 2, 2012, and a person who operated a camera by up to 2016.

On November 2012, 2012, the Defendant: (a) without obtaining the victim F’s consent to, or permission for, the reproduction of “G” computers in which the victim F is copyright; and (b) without permission granted the victim F’s consent to, use; and (c) produced type front-down signboards, cups, and liners in the name of “E” in the car page operated by the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the victim's computer program copyright without any justifiable reason.

2. Determination

A. The act of reproducing, transmitting, and distributing documentary files, which is a computer program, is recognized as creative and protected as a work since the producer’s creative identity is expressed in the production of documentary files, does not constitute copyright infringement. However, using a result expressed in the written program, i.e., the outcome expressed in the written program does not constitute copyright infringement unless the body is itself a creative production (see Supreme Court Decision 98Do732, May 15, 2001). (b) According to the facts charged and applicable in the instant written indictment, and the written opinion submitted by the Prosecutor, the Prosecutor’s submission of the written indictment on June 5, 2018, under the premise that the Defendant’s reproduction of the instant documentary file that “G” is subject to copyright infringement (hereinafter “the instant written program”).

(c)

In this regard, the defendant and his defense counsel are "E", which is used in carpet signboards, etc.