AI를 통한 창작활동과 형사법적 문제 - 사기죄 등을 중심으로 -

Abstract

With the rapid development of generative AI, human users can use generative AI to complete works of art, literary works such as poems, novels etc or movie scenarios and make videos close to short films. If a work created using a generative AI user hides the fact that it was created using a generative AI and marks it as his (only) work and targets a legal act or transaction, the establishment of the crime of fraud(Art. 347) or the crime of interference with business through fraudulent means(Art. 314) under the Criminal Code may be problematic. This article sets up such a hypothetical case group and examines in detail the issues that may be problematic when determining whether fraud or interference with business through fraudulent means in such cases. In the case of using assistants in the so-called “conceptual art” area, it was once questioned who should be viewed as the author, but in this case, the Supreme Court avoided judging “who is the author,” which is a pre-determined issue in determining whether fraud is established by using the principle of nemo iudex sine actore. In such a case, matters that should refrain from judicial judgment as much as possible for the autonomy of art and issues that have entered the realm of normative judgment should be distinguished from each other.