beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.05.23 2012고정2682

업무상배임

Text

Defendants are not guilty.

Reasons

1. Facts charged;

A. Defendant A, from March 2, 2010 to June 30, 201, was engaged in marketing as a director at the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul H building 1901 KH building I (hereinafter “victim”). After retirement of the victimized company, Defendant A was in charge of purchasing and managing materials at the damaged company. K is in charge of purchasing and managing materials at the victimized company.

Since the Defendant promised not to leak confidential information of the victimized company at the time of retirement of the victimized company, it has a duty not to leak confidential information such as the specifications of purchase of parts of the victimized company, and K has a duty not to leak internal data and confidential information of the victimized company in accordance with the security regulations as an employee of the victimized company.

Nevertheless, the defendant transferred to the Dispute Resolution to the Dispute Resolution to prepare a statement of parts purchase (BOM) after ascertaining the part supply source of TV for vehicles developed by the Dispute Resolution and making a unit price negotiations, which can be easily confirmed if the damaged company's BOM file is secured, and it is thought that it would be useful to negotiate the unit price with the supplier, and that it would be useful to negotiate with the supplier. On September 201, 201, at a place where the police officer's place can not be known, he/she is in charge of the development and the purchase of mass products by telephone to the K who has worked in the same way as the former in the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., which he/she intends to purchase at a low unit price from the I customer.

At around 13:40 on September 16, 201, K sent e-mail files to the Defendant’s e-mail account using e-mail, which include the parts list, purchase price, size for each part, required quantity, etc. used for the 7-person TV production of vehicles of the victimized company, leading to the same portion as the above e-mail at the above victimized company office. The Defendant acquired the above AOM file.