The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. In order to establish an infringement of the right of reproduction or the right of production of a derivative work protected by copyright law as to relation legal principles under the Copyright Act, it should be recognized that a work prepared based on an existing work claimed to have been infringed.

According to this, the relationship can be presumed if the possibility of access to the existing copyrighted works, and the similarity between the target copyrighted works and the existing copyrighted works is recognized, and in particular, if the target copyrighted works and the existing copyrighted works are prepared independently and the possibility of having reached the same result is recognized to be remarkably similar, the relationship can also be presumed based on such circumstance alone.

In addition, whether there is a substantial similarity between two copyrighted works or not, unlike the latter's judgment, the former's judgment can also be taken into account whether not only the expressions protected by the Copyright Act but also the expressions not protected by the Copyright Act are similar.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da55068, May 16, 2014). 2. Examining the grounds of appeal on relationship in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the record.

A. The lower court acknowledged the Defendants’ accessibility to the “P” created by the Plaintiff as a substitute for musical production (hereinafter “P”). The Defendant AB (hereinafter “Defendant AB”) planned from March 2007 and planned from around March 2007, and had Defendant B and C prepare a theater, and then broadcasted twice a week from December 22 of the same year (hereinafter “O”) and the script of the instant case from historical facts.