The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, as a general director of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant corporation”) on the Gangnam-gu Seoul F and 5th floor (hereinafter “H”), used a video (J & K) taken by the victim I to use a copyrighted work (hereinafter “the instant publicity video”) in H’s public relations video (hereinafter “the instant public relations video”) and owned copyright as a copyrighted director on December 2013, the Defendant infringed the copyright owner’s property right by using it without permission.

2. Determination

(a) Article 136(1)1 of the Copyright Act provides that a person who infringes upon a author’s property right or other property right protected under this Act by means of reproduction, performance, public transmission, exhibition, distribution, lending, or preparation of a derivative work shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding 50 million won, or both penalties may be imposed;

Article 141 of the same Act provides that when a representative of a corporation, or an agent, employee or other servant of a corporation or individual commits an offence under Article 136 (1) 1 of the same Act in connection with the business of the corporation or the individual, the corporation or the individual shall be punished by a fine under each corresponding provision in addition to the punishment of the offender.

In full view of the structure and contents of the above provisions, where an act of infringing on property rights, etc. was committed with respect to the corporation’s business, any person punished pursuant to Article 136(1)1 of the Copyright Act is the representative, employee, or other employee of the corporation who committed an act of direct infringement.

B. In the instant case, the evidence produced by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to view the Defendant as a representative or employee of a legal entity who committed an act of infringing on property rights by directly using the victim I’s video work as the second copyrighted work in connection with the business of the legal entity of the instant case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the act (in the fourth public trial protocol, the statement recording of L among the witness’s statement and the sixth public trial protocol, the witness M in the sixth public trial protocol.