2. This part of the judgment of the court on whether a trade secret has been infringed is identical to the part on “1. Facts recognized” and “2. Whether a trade secret has been infringed” in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part of the judgment is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

According to the list 5, Defendant C entered the Republic of Korea on January 30, 2018 and submitted an application for reconsideration of the case for discontinuance of prosecution. On November 29, 2018, Defendant C was indicted for violating the Unfair Competition Prevention Act (Leakage of trade secrets, etc.), etc. and sentenced Defendant C to a judgment of conviction of one year and four months for criminal facts as shown in the separate sheet 3 from the court on November 29, 2018. The above judgment became final and conclusive on December 21, 2018 (Seoul Central District Court 2018Da1334). Defendant D was convicted of Defendant C’s act of violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act (Leakage of trade secrets, etc.), and the aforementioned judgment became final and conclusive on January 6, 2018 (Seoul Central District Court 19Da6225, Nov. 27, 201). Defendant C was aware of the following facts concerning the crime of violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act (No evidence No. 133) or evidence No. 5 of Defendant C1.

① The Defendants retired from the Plaintiff at a similar time, and have prepared to establish a judicial branch, such as exchanging e-mail with the relevant persons from time to time, and entering the progress on bulletin board, in order to establish a company in China before retirement.

2. The term of office;