The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the statement of E of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the defendant may be found to have infringed upon the copyright of the victim by neglecting his/her right to use the printed materials for promotional use of the work of this case, even though he/she was aware of the fact that he/she exceeded his/her legitimate authority to use them, and neglecting it without any delay. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the result.

2. Determination

A. The lower court: (a) the Defendant was entitled to use the work of Victim F Co., Ltd. as a business member of H site within the scope of printing design; and (b) the Defendant produced printed materials using the instant work in which the said victim has copyright upon receiving a request for production of printed materials for publicity from the Korea Institute of D Academic Research; and (c) in the process, sent printed materials to E by e-mail.

In the meantime, E exchanged opinions, without speaking the Defendant, posted the printed materials for public relations use of the instant copyrighted work on the Internet page of the D Research Institute. At the time when the Defendant entered into a contract for the production of the instant copyrighted materials with the company where the Defendant had been working, it was not at issue, but at the time when the advertisement of D Research Institute was requested to produce the printed materials for public relations, and the Defendant sent the printed materials to the Defendant. Thus, the Defendant stated that he was aware of the posting. However, when E requested the company where the Defendant had worked prior to the towing, the time when E sent the printed materials to the Defendant by centering on the text file without almost little image file, and the time when E sent the printed materials after approximately one year from the time when E posted the printed materials for public relations use of the instant copyrighted materials, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is beyond the reasonable scope of authority.