1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a nonprofit incorporated association that allows users who need musical works with the permission of copyright trust management business from the Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism pursuant to Article 105 of the Copyright Act and Article 32 of the Civil Act with the permission of the Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism to use musical works on behalf of the copyright holders, collects user fees from the users and distributes the same to the copyright holders. The Defendant is a company that shows movies while running

B. A license agreement between the Plaintiff and the film producer for the use of a musical work managed by the Plaintiff upon the Plaintiff’s trust was made by entering matters concerning the method and conditions of the use of the musical work in accordance with the Plaintiff’s application form. Accordingly, the Plaintiff permits the use of the musical work in a manner that issues a license based on the contents of the above application for use. (ii) The Plaintiff previously used the application form stating information about the applicant, film producer, distributor’s name, screen name, film producer, distribution area, film distribution area, type of use, opening date, opening date, screen, time of use, etc., and on the basis of Article 34 of the Copyright Act collection regulation, the term “the license fee for the use of the musical work for the purpose of screening in the movie theater, etc. shall be determined in consultation with the employer,” and the term “the application for use is established at the time of payment of the user’s copyright fee, and at the time of unpaid usage fee payment, it should be subject to criminal liability under Article 136 (Crime of Infringement of Rights) of the Copyright Act.”

3. After that, the Plaintiff had film producers use the new form of application for use from October 2010, and the new form of application for use was almost the same as that of the previous form, but its contents were almost the same.