The judgment of the court below (including the portion not guilty) shall be reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant.

1. Progress of judgment;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground that the part of the instant performance, “L,” “M performance,” “N” performance, and “O,” among the facts charged in the instant case, constitutes a creative creation subject to the protection of the Copyright Act, on the grounds that it was difficult to view that the part of the instant performance, which the Defendant copied, constitutes a creative creation subject to the protection of the Copyright Act, was in violation of the Copyright Act, on the grounds that the Defendant committed a crime of violating the Copyright Act. Of the instant facts charged, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the ground that it was difficult to view that the part of the instant performance, which was copied by the Defendant, constitutes a creative creation subject to the protection of the Copyright Act.

B. As to this, the Defendant appealed on the grounds of misunderstanding of facts as to the guilty portion and unfair sentencing. The Prosecutor appealed on the grounds of misunderstanding of facts as to the acquittal portion of the grounds for appeal and unfair sentencing, and the Prosecutor dismissed all the appeals filed by the Defendant and the Prosecutor before remanding.

(c)

On this ground, the Defendant appealed on the ground of the misapprehension of the legal principles on the application of Article 29(1) of the Copyright Act, the misapprehension of the legal principles on the application of Article 140 of the Copyright Act, and the misunderstanding of the legal principles on copyrighted works and substantial similarity. The Supreme Court, for the following reasons, has erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the creativeness of copyrighted works or the subject of copyright protection and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

In this regard, the defendant's appeal was accepted, and the conviction part of the judgment prior to the remand was reversed.

“The court below copied the defendant during the performance of this case.

All of the determined parts are merely ideas or difficult to be seen as creative expressions, and do not constitute subject to copyright protection.

Therefore, the Defendant performed a performance similar to the instant performance.

Even if the copyright is infringed, it shall be considered as a copyright infringement.