저작권법상 ‘침해로 보는 행위’와 ‘양벌규정’(兩罰規定)을 둘러싼 쟁점 －컴퓨터프로그램 무단복제 적발 사안에서 회사법인의 형사책임 불인정 여부가 쟁점이 된 사례의 평석을 겸하여－

Abstract

The ruling is a case in which the company's corporate body has been denied criminal responsibility in the case of unauthorized copying of computer programs(Supreme Court Decision 2019Do10086 Decided Dec.24, 2019). Looking at the significance of the grand decision, the first grand decision is meaningful in that it clarified the specific and unspecified criteria for judgment of the charges in the issue of whether or not the regulations on punishment (Article 141 of the Copyright Act of Korea). Second, the grand prize decision is meaningful in that it made clear the acts and actors of each component in preparation for the provisions of Article 136 paragraph 2 subparagraph 4 and 124 paragraph 1 subparagraph 3 of the Copyright Act and the provisions of Article 136 paragraph 1 of the Copyright Act of Korea. Meanwhile, there is a question of whether the provisions of Article 140 of the Korean Copyright Act are intended to strengthen the prevention of criminal acts against crimes under the Copyright Act and to fully achieve the purpose of legal regulation, or, furthermore, to provide effective criminal relief in light of the purpose of the legislation. In short, in order to enhance the effectiveness of the punishment regulations and to establish practical criminal relief measures for corporations under the Korean Copyright Act, it is reasonable to set up additional punishment for corporations, including users, by separating punishment from punishment for individuals who are actors and corporations. In addition, it is desirable to raise the legal penalty for a cor- poration's fine against an individual, just like other patent or trademark laws. Furthermore, it is believed that there is a need to establish a new principle of specifying the facts charged of the criminal procedure under copyright act and to establish a special clause to extend the statute of limitations.