The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A A A Fine of KRW 3 million, Defendant B of a fine of KRW 10 million, and Defendant C of a fine of KRW 3 million.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, ① the Defendant did not have consented to the registration of false authors in advance, and even if the Defendant did not raise any objection separately after the issuance of “AB” book (hereinafter “instant book”), the Defendant does not constitute a joint principal offender for the crime of violating the Copyright Act due to false registration of authors.

② Article 137(1)1 of the Copyright Act (hereinafter “instant penal provision”) provides that a work shall be punished under the real name or pseudonym of a person other than the author, who is not the author. The term “public mark” under the said provision refers only to a case where the work is first made public or made public in the public. As such, even if a work is made public with a false indication of the author as to the books already published and made public without changing their contents, it does not constitute “public mark.”

B. Defendant B 1’s misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles refers only to the case where the work is first published or published in the public. Thus, even if the book was published by falsely marking the author’s name with respect to the book already published and published without changing the content thereof, it does not constitute “public notice”.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (the penalty amounting to KRW 10 million) is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

C1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles ① The term “public notice” as provided in the penal provision of this case refers only to the case where a work is first made public or published in the public. Thus, even if a book is made public with a false indication of the author without changing the content thereof, it does not constitute “public notice.”

In addition, the existing works are substantially published.