저작인격권침해죄에 관한 시론 - 대법원 2023. 11. 30. 선고 2020도10180 판결을 소재로 하여 = An Essay on the Crime of Author’s Moral Right Infringement - Focusing on Supreme Court Decision 2020Do10180 Decided November 30, 2023

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Recently, the Supreme Court ruled for the first time on the crime of author’s moral right infringement in the case of posting other person’s SNS posts on one’s own SNS bulletin board without the author’s permission, and presented in detail the legally protected interest (Rechtsgut) and the degree of protection which the crime seeks to protect, and the criteria for recognizing defamation in the crime of author’s moral right infringement.
The Supreme Court stated that the purpose of the crime of author’s moral right infringement is to protect social reputation of the author or performer along with the author’s moral right. In addition, if there is a risk of infringing the social value or evaluation of the author or performer through an act of infringing on the author’s moral right, the crime is established even if there is no result or concrete risk of the social value or evaluation infringement. However, the Supreme Court said that author’s moral right infringement does not immediately constitute the crime of author’s moral right infringement just because there was an act that violated the author’s moral right, and that it should be carefully judged in consideration of various objective circumstances.
There have been many judgments and research results in courts and academia regarding copyright infringement, but there have been few meaningful judgments or studies on the crime of author’s moral right infringement. However, in copyright lawsuit practice, copyright holders often claim both copyright infringement and author’s moral right infringement, and in particular, copyright holders tend to prefer criminal remedies for copyright infringement in Korea. Therefore, it is of practical importance to present clear criteria for judgment on the crime of author’s moral right infringement. In the case of the author’s economic right, an appropriate balance of interests is achieved between copyright holders and users through application of limitations on the author’s economic rights, including fair use, but there is a lack of regulations concerning the author’s moral right with regard to adjustment of interests such as fair use, which can easily lead to serious restrictions on freedom of expression.
Therefore, the Supreme Court’s call for a careful judgment on the establishment of the crime of author’s moral right infringement, while proposing the legally protected interests and the degree of protection thereof, is very meaningful in terms of guaranteeing freedom of expression.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 박상기, "형법학" 집현재 2018
• 2 오영근, "형법총론" 박영사 2021
• 3 임웅, "형법총론" 법문사 2021
• 4 이재상, "형법총론" 박영사 2022
• 5 윤영철, "형법의 자유보장원칙으로서의 체계비판적 법익론에 관한 고찰" 홍익대학교 법학연구소 18 (18): 2017
• 6 이재상, "형법각론" 박영사 2016
• 7 이정원, "형법각론" 신론사 2012
• 8 주호노, "형법각론" 법문사 2023
• 9 정성근, "형법각론" 성균관대학교 출판부 2015
• 10 배대헌, "현행 저작권법상 저작인격권의 법리에 관한 검토" 한국지식재산학회 (21) : 2006
• 11 심담, "주석형법" 한국사법행정학회 2017
• 12 민영선 ; 계승균, "저작형법에 관한 시론" 한국형사법무정책연구원 17 (17): 2006
• 13 이규홍, "저작인격권의 형사적 보호-‘휴대폰 벨소리’ 판매 등 사건을 중심으로-" 한국정보법학회 11 (11): 2007
• 14 이상정, "저작인격권의 연혁과 해석상 몇 가지 쟁점에 관한 소고" 한국정보법학회 23 (23): 2019
• 15 윤권순, "저작인격권의 역사적 기원" 언론중재위원회 4 (4): 2018
• 16 권태상, "저작인격권의 성질과 내용에 대한 고찰" 한국사법행정학회 (87) : 2019
• 17 강명수, "저작인격권에 대한 고찰" 동아대학교 법학연구소 (58) : 2013
• 18 정진근, "저작인격권에 관한 재고찰" 한국저작권위원회 (가을) : 2014
• 19 권영준, "저작권법주해" 박영사 2007
• 20 최경수, "저작권법제사 연구" 한국저작권위원회 2017
• 21 허희성, "저작권법개설" 태양출판사 1977
• 22 장인숙, "저작권법개론" 교학도서주식회사 1960
• 23 허희성, "저작권법 축조해설(하)" 명문프리컴 2011
• 24 박성민, "저작권법 벌칙규정의 형사불법 - 저작권침해죄의 주관적 요건으로서 의거성과 고의에 대한 형법적 판단을 중심으로 -" 한국저작권위원회 (여름) : 2018
• 25 박성호, "저작권법" 박영사 2017
• 26 이해완, "저작권법" 박영사 2019
• 27 황적인, "저작권법" 법문사 1988
• 28 오승종, "저작권법" 박영사 2020
• 29 양천수 ; 하민경, "저작권 침해죄의 정당성에 대한 비판적 고찰" 한국외대 법학연구소 37 (37): 2013
• 30 박영규 ; 이상용, "인격권의 침해-저작인격권을 중심으로" 서울지방변호사회 27 : 1997
• 31 김일수, "새로쓴 형법각론" 박영사 2016
• 32 허희성, "베른협약 축조개설(파리 규정)" 일신서적출판사 1994
• 33 성낙현, "법익개념의 내용적 실체와 기능" 한국법학원 2014
• 34 차상육, "동일성유지권 침해의 요건사실에 대한 해석론과 입법론" 한국저작권위원회 (가을) : 2018
• 35 長谷川遼, "著作者人格権の保護法益について(2)" 137 (137): 2020
• 36 長谷川遼, "著作者人格権の保護法益について(1)" 137 (137): 2020
• 37 田中宏和, "著作者人格権に関する課題と検討: 著作者人格権の不行使特約と放棄の問題を参考に" 82 (82): 2010
• 38 加戶守行, "著作權法逐條講義" 著作權情報センタ- 2013
• 39 三山裕三, "著作權法詳說" 勁草書房 2016
• 40 半田正夫, "著作權法コンメンタ-ル3" 勁草書房 2015
• 41 小倉秀夫, "著作權法コンメンタ-ル (3)" 第一法規出版 2020
• 42 岡村久道, "著作權法" 民事法硏究會 2019
• 43 澁谷達紀, "著作權法" 中央經濟社 2013
• 44 張睿映, "著作權判例百選" 有斐閣 2019
• 45 松川實, "著作権法第113条第6項の意義と機能- 著作者人格権侵害のみなし行為と名誉毀損" 49 (49): 2007
• 46 中山信弘, "著作権法" 有斐閣 2020
• 47 Donald S. Chisum, "Understanding Intellectual Property Law" LexisNexis 2015
• 48 Marshall A. Leaffer, "Understanding Copyright Law" Carolina Academic Press 2019
• 49 Gerald Dworkin, "The Moral right of the Author: Moral rights and the Common Law Countries" 19 : 229-, 1995
• 50 박성민, "SNS상의 저작권침해 유형과 경미한 저작권침해에 대한 형법의 자제" 한국형사법학회 26 (26): 2014
• 51 Robert C. Bird, "Protecting Moral rights in the United States and the United Kingdom: Challenges and Opportunities under the U.K.’s new Performances Regulations" 24 : 213-, 2006
• 52 William F. Patry, "Patry on Copyright § 16:21"
• 53 Melville B Nimmer, "Nimmer on copyright Vol 3" Lexisnexis 2006
• 54 F van Isacker, "Letter from Belgium"
• 55 H Desbois, "Le droit dauteur" 1950
• 56 Sam Ricketson, "International Copyright and Neighbouring Rights The Berne Convention and Beyond Vol Ⅰ" Oxford 2006
• 57 Silke Von Lewinski, "International Copyright Law and Policy" Oxford 2008
• 58 Bently, "Intellectual Property Law" Oxford 2022
• 59 "House Report at 15, as reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N"