Ga. Violation of the Copyright Act (amended by Act No. 1 to 3)

Crime Purpose of Violation of the Copyright Act

(b) Violation of Information and Communications Network Promotion Act;

(obscenity) obscenitys

C. Violation of the Resident Registration Act

1. A. B.

2.(a) B

3.(a)(b) C

4. (a) D. D

White Lives

Attorney E (the defendant A, the defendant D)

May 8, 2009

Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for ten months and by a fine of 10,00,000 won, by six months and by a fine of 5,00,000,000 won, and by a fine of 10,000,000 won, and a stock company C shall be punished by a fine of 10,000 won. If Defendant A, B, and D fail to pay each of the above fines, each of the above fines shall be confined to Defendant A, B, and D in a workhouse for the period converted into one day. With respect to Defendant A and D, each of the days of detention prior to the pronouncement of this judgment shall be included in the above imprisonment.

However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of each of the above imprisonment with labor for the defendant A, B, and D shall be suspended. The order for the defendant A to provide each community service for 160 hours, each of 80 hours to the defendant B, and D.

Criminal facts

1. Defendant A, Defendant B, and Defendant C are the representative director of the Company C, Defendant C’s office chief director of the Company C, Defendant C is a corporation that operates the website “F” (G), and “H” website (I), respectively, established for the purpose of providing Internet information service on December 27, 2005, and the Internet shopping mall operation business. If the two are sent and stored a file to some users at the central server of large capacity installed on the Internet (Internet) so that other users can pay a certain amount of money to the website operators and receive the download from them.

A. Defendant A and Defendant B

Although the Defendants knew that various digital data traded through the web hard site are most without permission for copyright use, and illegal obscene materials are distributed, the Defendants operated the web hard site and operated the web site to provide various digital contents business (such as this, hereinafter referred to as 'business operator') to other members, each time they receive the digital data download (hereinafter referred to as 'the download'), and then divide the fee paid to them through the digital bulletin board 2005, 27 December 2006, 2006, 'FF' around July 1, 2006, 'The above 'H' was opened and operated to the above digital bulletin board 36 'the above digital information storage '6 '6 '6 '6 '6 '6 'the above digital information' by providing them to other members, 'the digital bulletin board 2006' and 'the above '3 '6 '6 '6 '6 '6 'the above digital information'.

Meanwhile, the Defendants imposed 10-15% of the charges (fM-22MB per KRW 1 won, and the settlement amount, and provided 10-15% of the charges to the operator in the name of "sharek," and provided 85-90% of the charges to the operator, so that they make profits of Defendant C, then they referred to as "sharek," and operated in the above site the points that can be exchanged with merchandise coupons or a package, and agreed to exchange them with merchandise coupons accumulated as merchandise coupons, etc. when they want to exchange them with merchandise coupons.

With the knowledge that digital contents and pornography subject to author's property rights are distributed illegally on their own sites, the Defendants neglected various digital contents and obscene contents that have been put on business by the sellers, including taking measures, such as deletion of the relevant files, and setting a scam language formally, etc. In addition, the Defendants provided a scam storage space free of charge and manage such digital contents and obscene contents as games, film, television, sludge, oil, portable apparatus, lectures, (19), etc. by classifying them into those items such as games, film files, obscene materials, etc. so that users can easily find the digital contents and obscene materials that they want, and made it easy for users to download only by exposing them with the relevant film posters or obscene pictures as they are on the date on which they are registered in the bulletin board to make them available only for perusal. In addition, the Defendants provided a new recommendation to members or members who joined the scambling system by inducing them to send out the digital contents to all members who joined the scambling program throughout their number of months.

As such, the Defendants recruited members through active exchange, public relations and provision of various conveniences so that they can download various digital contents and obscene materials subject to protection of author's property rights to the server, and made these files stored in the server so that they can get the users who wanted to download.

(1) On October 16, 2007, the Defendants operated the above F site, and J from August 1, 2006 to January 13, 2009, operated the said F site with ‘L’ copyright on the said F site. From August 1, 2006 to January 13, 2009, the Defendants: J, M, D, N, andO, a member of the above site, operated the above F site; from around 30,45 times in total, the video files subject to copyright protection to 30,445 times; from around 5, 2009 to 20,000,000, the film files were copied to the above F site to 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00.

(2) On November 9, 2008, the Defendants operated the above F site, and the business route with which the names of members of the above F site can not be identified (NAS) operated the above F site as obscenity’s obscenity on the bulletin board of the above F site “U”, and opened a public notice of obscenity’s sexual act with obscenity’s sexual act with obscenity’s sexual act with obscenity’s sexual act from October 19, 208 to January 7, 2009, and the above website’s name as a member of the above site’s member was 178 times in total, and from November 21, 2008 to November 20, 2008, the Defendants operated the above H site and posted the above 178 obscenity’s obscenity’s obscenity’s obscenity’s obscenity’s name with 0.5 obscenity’s obscenity’s obscenity’s name and 15 obscenity’s obscenity’s obscenity’.

In addition, the Defendants made the above F site and the above H site operated by the Defendants up to 3.8 billion won from August 2006 to January 2009, and up to 3.8 billion won from March 2007 to January 2009, the above H site sold approximately KRW 4.6 billion in total.

As a result, the Defendants made it easy for many business partners such as D and N to infringe the author’s property right by means of reproduction and public transmission, thereby aiding and abetting the infringement of the author’s property right habitually for profit, and distributing and displaying obscene images through information and communication network in collusion.

B. Defendant C

The Defendant, the representative of the Defendant, and the employees of the Defendant, as described in the above paragraph (a) above, assisted the Defendant’s infringement of author’s property rights regarding the Defendant’s business, and distributed and displayed obscene images via an information and communications network.

2. Defendant D

A. Violation of the Copyright Act

From August 1, 2006 to February 2, 2009, the Defendant opened a “W” club while working as a member of the said F site, and opened the said club at the time of the said club’s shop with various movies and other works on the said website, and received 10% to 15% of the fee paid by other members whenever other members receive the work downloaded, in the form of cyber money, and received the said cyber money in exchange for merchandise coupon from the point bottom in the said F website to raise profits.

On August 1, 2006, the Defendant, at the home of the Defendant, called the “ZB” in the name of the Defendant at the Dong of the Defendant, J. X apartment Y, J., Sinnam-si, Sindong-gu, J. Y, the Defendant opened the “AB” film in the name of the Defendant to the “F server, so that many and unspecified members may download it.” In addition, from August 1, 2006 to January 13, 2009, the Defendant copied the said AC copyrighted work in the above manner as described in the attached list (5) by using the “AD” in the name of the Defendant or the “AC” used by the Defendant, as seen above, so that many and unspecified users can easily reproduce the said work at any time, thereby infringing the copyright holder’s public transmission for profit-making purposes.

(b) Violation of the Resident Registration Act;

On May 10, 2008, at the same place as the above paragraph (a) above, the Defendant used the victim AC’s resident registration number (AE) by entering the victim’s resident registration number into a member by using the data that he/she came to know at the F website in order to increase profits by downloading copyrighted works such as motion pictures, etc. at the F website, and then illegally used the victim’s resident registration number.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Prosecutorial suspect interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning AF;

1. Each complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (which shall be 64 through 84 pages, 163 through 168 pages, 421 through 445 pages, 495 pages, 510 through 517 pages, 227 through 2235 pages, 2325 pages);

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

A. Defendant A and B

(1) Aiding and abetting infringement of author's property right

(A) From August 1, 2006 to June 28, 2007: Article 97-5 of the former Copyright Act (amended by Act No. 8101, Dec. 28, 2006; hereinafter the same) and Article 32(1) of the Criminal Act

(B) From June 29, 2007 to February 5, 2009: Article 136(1) of each Copyright Act; Article 32(1) of the Criminal Act

(c) Selection of punishment: Selection of each kind of punishment.

(2) The distribution and display of obscene images through the information and communications network: Articles 74(1)2 and 44-7(1)1 of the Act on Promotion of the Utilization of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc.; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; and each choice of imprisonment

B. Defendant C

(1) Aiding and abetting infringement of author's property right

(A) From August 1, 2006 to June 28, 2007: Articles 103 and 97-5 of the former Copyright Act; Article 32(1) of the Criminal Act

(B) From June 29, 2007 to February 5, 2009: Articles 141 and 136(1) of the Copyright Act; Article 32(1) of the Criminal Act

(2) The distribution and display of obscene images via an information and communications network: Articles 75(1), 74(1)2, and 44-7(1)1 of the Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc.

C. Defendant D

(1) Infringement on author's property right

(A) From August 1, 2006 to June 28, 2007: Selection of punishment under Article 97-5 (b) of the former Copyright Act from June 29, 2007 to January 13, 2009: Selection of punishment under Article 136 (1) (c) of the Copyright Act: Selection of punishment concurrently.

(2) Illegal use of another person’s resident registration number: Article 37 subparag. 9 of the Resident Registration Act; Article 37 subparag. 1 of the Imprisonment;

(a) Defendant A and B: Article 32(2) and Article 55(1)3 and 6 of the Criminal Act;

B. Defendant C: Articles 32(2) and 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Defendant A, B, and D: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Code

1. Calculation of days of detention;

Defendant A and D: Article 57 of the Criminal Code

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant A, B, and D: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code

1. Social service order;

Defendant A, B, and D: Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 59 of the Probation, etc. Act

Grounds for sentencing

Defendant A and D have no record of criminal punishment except for those sentenced to 2 to 3 times as they commit the instant crime, and Defendant B has no record of criminal punishment. After the instant crime, Defendant A transferred the instant Internet site and did not operate the said site any longer. Defendant B retired from C, Defendant D closed down the instant “W” club, Defendant A, Defendant A, B, and C had cancelled the instant complaint under agreement with the complainant, Defendant A and D committed the instant crime for more than one month, Defendant A and D committed the instant crime. Defendant A are in profoundly against the Defendant A, B, and D committed the instant crime, and they reflects the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means, consequence, etc. of the instant crime, and various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime.

Parts of innocence

1. Summary of the facts charged

Defendant A, B, in collusion with business partners, such as D, N,O, M, and J, committed an infringement of author’s property rights on digital contents, etc. as described in 1-A of criminal facts. Defendant C, a representative of the company, and Defendant C, a representative of the company, committed such an act in violation of the Copyright Act.

2. Determination

The actual status of the use of the Internet site of this case, which can be recognized and determined by the evidence mentioned above, and the recognition and predictability of Defendant A and B, who is the operator or manager thereof, and technical measures

In full view of the limitations, it can be said that the above Defendants were sufficiently aware and predicted that the members frequently download a number of digital content files which were not permitted to use by the copyright holder through the Internet site of this case, and that other members frequently download the files.

However, there is no clear evidence to deem that Defendant A and B had an intent or purpose of unlawful copyright infringement at the time of the establishment of the Internet site. ② The Internet site of this case seems to have considerable digital contents with which the Internet site of this case is operated, in addition to various kinds of digital contents not authorized by the author’s property right holder or obscene materials, and other unlawful data and information. ③ The web site services offered by the Internet site of this case are one of the online services that store and share digital contents files in the web server storage space. The contents and legality of the digital contents are first determined by the members of the online service site. ④ When the members of the Internet site of this case open digital contents files, the Defendants’ efforts to obtain prior consent on the right to use digital contents or its contents, or to obtain prior consent on the right to use digital contents or make prior notification of the digital contents to the operator of the site without specific digital contents monitoring methods, and ⑤ The Defendants’ efforts to recognize the digital contents’ specific digital contents contents’ digital contents’ digital contents’ digital contents’ digital contents’ digital contents’ digital contents protection measures by comparing them with the above.

Therefore, it is difficult to view that the users who run the Internet site of this case with Defendant A, B, and illegal digital content files intended to share the essential elements of the infringement on author's property rights among them, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

However, in a case where a court recognizes a minor criminal facts beyond the criminal facts prosecuted within the scope recognized as identical to the facts charged, if it does not give substantial disadvantage to the defendant's defense in light of the process of the trial, etc., it can recognize the minor criminal facts ex officio without changing the indictment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do995, Jun. 24, 2004), Defendant A, B, and C as guilty of the crime of aiding and abetting in violation of the Copyright Act.

3. Conclusion

Thus, this part of the facts charged against Defendant A, B, and C shall be pronounced not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act because it falls under a case where there is no proof of crime. However, as seen earlier, as long as the court found Defendant guilty of the crime of aiding and abetting a violation of the Copyright Act included therein

Judge Goh Sung