beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 195,342,465 with respect to the Plaintiff, and the period from December 6, 2016 to January 12, 2017.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a copyright holder of the instant program, as a company that develops and sells rap (Matab program; hereinafter “instant program”) which is a computer program for the development of algorithm, data analysis, data visualization, and numerical calculation.
B. Defendant B is a professor of software department at a public college at a university A (hereinafter “Defendant University”) of the Defendant Educational Foundation A (hereinafter “Defendant University”) and received a summary order of a fine of five million won (Seoul District Court Decision 2016Ma1009) for the following criminal facts, and filed an application for formal trial and is pending in the lawsuit.
(However, there is no dispute over criminal facts, and only dispute over sentencing, etc.). The defendant is currently in office as a professor of the software department at A University University.
1. On December 9, 2012, the Defendant installed one “Matlab R2012a” program in a computer by causing a graduate student to dissatising technological protection measures due to an unsatising circumstance; around September 12, 2013 and around November 18, 2013, at the above university DSSP practice room, installed three programs without permission by providing three graduate students with one program in two computers; and
2. On March 2014, using servers and computers installed in the pertinent university DSSP practice room, the program was opened and circulated by no later than December 22, 2014, “MatlabR 2012a” program, which dissatiscing technological protection measures due to the insurgic reason. Around May 15, 2014, the Defendant posted a notice on the method (i.e., ID and cancer input) allowing anyone to freely reproduce the said program by accessing the “MatlabR 2012a” bulletin board at the Defendant’s domicile.
On the other hand, on March 17, 2016, the Defendant University was subject to the disposition of Defendant B’s above criminal facts at the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office (Evidence of Evidence).
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 4, 7, Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.