응용미술품의 저작권법적인 보호- 이승환 vs 컨츄리꼬꼬의 “무대디자인 도용” 사건을 계기로 -

This breakdown on specific case - Lee Seung Hwan vs Contry Koko case - reveals that applied art, especially the stage design in this case, deserves the copyright and emphasize that the copyright for applied art covers the needs where the designright cannot cover - for example, moral right. The 2000 Amendment of the Copyright Act provided separability test as to the eligibility for the protection of applied art. “Independent artistic feature” test in Daihan Textile case should be noted in that it appeared to be the main utility before the 2000 Amendment of the Copyright Act. The extension of copyright protection to the applied art should be eligible within limited scope, for that it falls under the areas of both designright and copyright. To avoid cumulation of protection system for both designright and copyright, mass along with separability teat and mass manufacturing test should limit the copyright for the applied art. Therefore, the court should come up with more appropriate test and relevant theories for the Lee Seung Hwan vs Country Koko case.