According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the following facts are recognized:

A. M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”) was established around August 26, 2010, and the Defendant was in the position of the vice president of M.

Key divided technology: The ballot box key is a technology to ensure the security of electronic ballot boxes by dividing it into several managers of institutions using the ballot boxes.

Concrying signature technology: The contents of the voting paper are encrypted and stored in the electronic ballot box to ensure the secrecy of voting information (voting and voting contents).

A non-fixedly delegated technology: A technology that makes it possible to verify whether the voting information (Voting and voting contents) code is modified after dividing it into the server and voters by some parts.

B. M acquired five patents related to online electronic voting (patent number D, DE, DF, DG, and DH) from February 2, 2012 to February 2013 (based on registration date, Nos. 1, 212 to 354 of the evidence record). The main content of the above patent is related to measures to strengthen security in online electronic voting, such as key division technology, concealed signature technology, and non-art delegation technology (hereinafter the above three technologies are referred to as “patent security technology of this case,” and the specific contents are as follows).

The Defendant proposed the online electronic voting business to O and K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”), and on March 2013, K submitted an “online electronic voting proposal” to the effect that K provides a platform and applies the patent security technology of the instant case owned by M, thereby meeting the four principles of election and guidelines for online voting (No. 358 through 425 of the evidence record).

C On June 4, 2013, K and the “Agreement on the Services Provided online Voting” were concluded on June 4, 2013 (Evidence No. 3).