The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is mainly engaged in security business with chain C, a company established for the purpose of manufacturing and selling closed circuit cameras and electronic application devices.

D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) and E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E”) are companies established for the purpose of the production and manufacturing of electronic components, export and import business.

On May 1, 2010, the Defendant joined the Plaintiff and promoted it to the head of the department of business on January 1, 2011. On July 1, 2016, the Defendant received the annual salary of KRW 50,000,000 by promotion to a business director.

On March 31, 2018, the Defendant prepared and delivered a written pledge to protect trade secrets, etc. (hereinafter referred to as “written pledge”) containing the following contents to the Plaintiff, and withdrawn from the Plaintiff.

After the retirement of the plaintiff, the defendant was employed as a member of E and went to D.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 10, 11, and Eul evidence Nos. 3, and the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendant, while working for the plaintiff, shall exercise overall control over the overall business management of the plaintiff, and shall exercise overall control over the development of products, orders, etc. with respect to the F, which is the plaintiff's OEM company (hereinafter "F"), and acquired business secrets.

After the Defendant submitted a written oath to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff entered E and D, a direct competitor, and the Plaintiff became aware of the fact that he produced and supplied CCTV from around that time, and that the Defendant included the Frelated persons, and that he was produced for D with the products developed separately by the Plaintiff.

Since the Defendant violated the above pledge, it is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 50,000,000 equivalent to the annual salary before his retirement and the delayed damages.

Judgment

Even if an agreement exists between an employer and an employee on the prohibition of competition, such agreement excessively limits the freedom of occupation and the right to work of an employee guaranteed under the Constitution, or excessively limits free competition.