The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. The summary of the case and the facts premised on the case

A. The summary of the case is that the plaintiff broadcasts and transmits the video works produced by the defendant's imitates of the video works produced by the plaintiff against the defendant, thereby causing confusion as to the source by using marks similar to the plaintiff's business marks that have infringed or known moral rights as to the plaintiff's video works (right of reproduction, secondary copyrighted works, etc.) and other moral rights, or causing confusion as to the identity and reputation of the plaintiff's business mark, or committing an act of unfair competition that damages the plaintiff's reputation and reputation of the video works constructed with considerable effort and investment, and without permission for customers' intake, and thus seeking the payment of damages 150 million won (property damages 10 million won and damages 50 million won and damages 50 million won) and its delay damages.

The judgment of the court of first instance rejected the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that Defendant’s video works are not substantially similar to the Plaintiff’s video works, and that Plaintiff’s video works were not used as the Plaintiff’s product mark or business mark, and that Defendant’s act of manufacturing and conducting business activities using some pages or composition of Plaintiff’s video works does not constitute tort. The Plaintiff appealed against this.

나. 전제된 사실관계 【증거】갑1, 2, 3, 갑14의 1, 2, 갑15의 1, 2, 3, 갑16의 1, 2, 갑17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 갑26의 1, 2, 갑28, 갑34, 55의 1, 2, 갑57의 1에서 35, 갑58의 1에서 17, 을1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 15, 18, 19, 32와 변론 전체의 취지 ⑴ 당사자 ㈎ 원고는 지상파방송사업을 목적으로 하는 회사로서 2011. 3. 23.부터 ‘짝’이라는 제목의 영상물을 제작한 다음, 매주 수요일 저녁 11시 15분부터 60분 동안 방송하였다.

㈏ 피고는 방송, 영화, 음악, 공연, 게임 등의 사업을 목적으로 하는 회사로서 방송채널 ‘tvN’을 통하여...