방조범의 성립범위

Abstract

The merit of interactive flow of information, convenient popularization of information and massive information share through the internet is a quick and simple obtainment of the required information for everyone and anyone. Due to such characteristic, the probability of copyright violation through internet is increasing. However who is to take the blame as civil liability or criminal responsibility? Recently, The Supreme Court has judged civil procedures and Criminal cases about infringement of Copyright. Especially regarding Soribada service, whether the users who download the share files on P2P basis and the service providers are subject to the liability of copyright infringement. Soribada received a verdict of guilty as to aid and abet violation of the Copyright Act. The Criminal points at issue of Soribada service occasion are as follows. First, whether the service users have infringed the right to reproduce or distribution rights of the record producers. Second, who commits a crime have to cherish intention or at least wilful negligence. And intention of reproducing or distributing violated Copyright Act, includes who is the principal offender. but Soribada program providers don't have intention of the principal offender directly or indirectly. Third, crime commited by ommission demands commission duty and responsible persons are supposed to undertake their obligation. If not, ommission is criminal 'ACT'. but is Soribada program provider legally responsible persons? or What is his duty essentially? Thus, this paper reviews the criminal issues on the copyright violation of the P2P program provider, focusing Sribada occasion. In conclusion, The Supreme Court a judicial precedent 2005do872 regards it as appropriate to be given a decision of not guilty.