beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay KRW 20 million to the plaintiff 12% per annum from June 12, 2019 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a broadcasting business entity and the copyright holder of C channel broadcasting program, whose main purpose is to broadcast programs.
B. 1) Around 2011, the Defendant received a broadcast program sent by a domestic broadcasting business entity, including the Plaintiff, through a “D satellite broadcast,” and planned to run a fee-charging broadcasting business for real-time forwarding to the members residing abroad via the Internet, who immediately downloaded via a computer. 2) From around 2011 to February 2019, the Defendant installed the antenna, distribution machine, computer, Internet, etc. receiving D satellite broadcast in China and operated a fee-charging broadcasting business with the trade name “E”.
In addition, from June 2018 to February 2019, the Defendant provided paid broadcast service in the same way in Korea.
3) From June 2015 to February 2019, the Defendant paid fees to F by entrusting the agency business, etc. located in Japan, Australia, Guam (U.S.). From August 2018 to February 2019, the Defendant installed and operated the F’s office located in Ansan-si with a view to transmitting the high-quality broadcasting of E, a computer and a distribution machine, etc.; 4) from September 15, 201 to November 15, 2018, the Defendant received KRW 2,00,610,791 from overseas visitors.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, since the defendant infringed the plaintiff's author's property right, the plaintiff is obligated to pay as damages the amount equivalent to the amount which the plaintiff would normally receive by exercising his right.
(Article 125(2) of the Copyright Act. According to the purport of Gap evidence 7 and the entire arguments, the plaintiff entered into a contract to supply a program that allows the plaintiff to run IPTV business only within the New Zealand area with respect to the "G company" and the plaintiff's broadcasting program in November 2010.