K&P Law Firm successfully defended app developers who created and distributed an auxiliary application to enhance the usability of delivery apps used by riders. The defendants were acquitted in both the first instance and appellate courts.
Indictment Summary:
The victim company, R Corp., developed and operated an application called "Live As Is" for food delivery services. The app distributes delivery requests from restaurants to delivery personnel ("riders") and pays them after deducting a commission from the delivery fee. Due to varying delivery fees and preferences among riders, the victim company implemented rules in the app to ensure fair distribution of delivery requests. The app's terms of service prohibit unauthorized use of programs that could adversely affect the system.
The defendants, A and B, collaborated to develop a program called "Magic" that added unauthorized functions to the "Live As Is" app, including features to automatically select orders based on minimum payment, maximum distance, and preferred vendors. They sold this program to riders for an average monthly fee of 60,000 won, making 1,139 sales between January 2, 2020, and February 7, 2021.
The prosecution alleged that by distributing the "Magic" program, the defendants interfered with the victim company's fair distribution system, thereby committing the offense of obstruction of business by computer interference under Article 314(2) of the Criminal Act.
K&P Law Firm's Defense:
1. For the crime of obstruction of business by computer interference to be established, there must be an actual occurrence of interference with information processing, rendering the device unable to function according to its intended purpose (Supreme Court Decision 2008Do11978, April 9, 2009).
2. The "Magic" program operates using accessibility features, merely automating actions that users could perform manually. It does not provide information unavailable in the original app or overload the system.
3. The "Live As Is" app already includes some condition-setting features, and there's no evidence that it was designed to ensure perfectly fair distribution of orders.
4. Recognizing functions not implemented in the original app as part of its intended purpose could lead to an overly broad interpretation of criminal liability.
5. The crime of obstruction of business by computer interference requires actual interference with the information processing device's ability to function as intended (Supreme Court Decision 2011Do7943, May 24, 2012).
6. The "Live As Is" app does not appear to have the purpose of ensuring completely equal distribution of orders regardless of rider preferences, as claimed in the indictment.
7. The "Magic" program was developed using Google's publicly available accessibility services, which are designed to improve app usability.
8. The program does not modify the original app's memory or stored files, nor does it input false information or improper commands.
Court's Decision:
The court accepted K&P Law Firm's arguments and acquitted the defendants in both the first instance and appellate trials.
This case highlights the importance of carefully examining the technical aspects and intended purposes of software applications in cases involving alleged computer-related offenses.
Tel. +82 32 864 8300
Email: info@kimnpark.com
Please Visit our Website:
