부정경쟁방지및영업비밀보호에관한법률위반(영업비밀누설등)
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
The Defendant is a representative director of Company B, who runs a mobile phone case sales business, and is a person who uses Add' D' or d'E' at “C,” an Internet site.
No trade secret shall be acquired or used, or disclosed to a third party, for the purpose of obtaining unjust profits or inflicting damage on the owner of the trade secret.
On February 6, 2015, around 00:33, the Defendant: (a) posted the S6’s “device-Dim.p.p. file” drawings on the Internet community website C bulletin board as “S6 drawings” in the name of “China Y6 drawings,” and “China Y6 drawings,” in the name of “F apartment unit 106 and 701, an apartment unit 106 and 701, an apartment unit in Ansan-si, Sinsan-si, the Defendant: (b) via B, an employee, who is a Chinese employee, B; and (c) Non-exp.p. file drawings, which include the “S6 design drawings,” in the gallon-si’s bulletin board, which is the Internet community site; and (d) by means of the gallon-type drawings, which is included in the above gallon-type file, and the gallon-type drawings, which are included in the gallon-type drawings.
Accordingly, the defendant disclosed the victim's trade secret to a third party for the purpose of obtaining improper profits or causing damage to the owner of the trade secret.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Statement of each police statement made to J and I;
1. Application of respective Acts and subordinate statutes written in C notice and e-mail based on the presumption of damage;
1. The main sentence of Article 18 (2) of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act concerning facts constituting a crime;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act indicate that the victimized company suffered a large amount of loss due to the instant case, and the injured company did not reach an agreement with the victimized company, and following the assertion of the victimized company.