If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

From November 27, 2006 to June 30, 2009, the Defendant served as a motor vehicle insurance teleter in E (hereinafter “victim Company”) operated by D from April 8, 2013 to June 5, 2015.

When the victim company operates F, which is a comparative site for automobile insurance, and the customer who wants to make a comparative estimate requests for counseling on the above site, the victim company distributed counseling among the defendant and the same telemers in order, and stored customer information such as the customer's vehicle registration number, the date of concluding the insurance contract, the date of the insurance contract, the insurance company, the insurance company, the contents of the insurance contract, the credit card number, the credit card number, and the name of the telemers in charge, and the above customer information could have access to the victim company's employees.

On June 2015, the Defendant was notified of dismissal from D around the early 2015 when there was a conflict between D and D regarding the reduction in the allowance, and the Defendant arbitrarily released the above customer information he managed to use it.

1. Since the Defendant in occupational breach of trust took an oath that “in the event of being treated as confidential business, customer information shall not be used or leaked outside of customer information” against the victim company, there was a duty to return or discard the business confidential data when withdrawing the victim company.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, in breach of his duties, received information on 1,084 customers by accessing WIms, which is a customer management network of the victim company, at around 20:38 on June 4, 2015, in violation of his/her duties, and received information on 1,084 customers by X-cell file: the same month;

5. The above company did not return or discard customer information data, which is a business secret of the victim company while withdrawing from the above company.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired property benefits equivalent to the above business confidential property value and suffered property damage equivalent to the same amount in the victim company.

2...