logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.07.27 2016고합877
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

around June 2007, the Defendant entered the victim C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) that manufactures LED and semiconductor wafers manufacturing equipment in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, and worked as the customer support vice head of the business support headquarters as a vice head of the customer support headquarters. On January 2, 2013, the Defendant established and operated the Defendant’s private business chain for the purpose of semiconductor doping A/S, etc. from around April 2014 after the withdrawal from office.

The defendant, who was working in C, shall not leak trade secrets or important business assets acquired while on duty, or use them for personal interests of competition companies or defendants, and there was a duty to return or discard trade secrets or important business assets acquired while on duty at C, or to return or discard them to C.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen below, acquitted the Defendant of the violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (Leakage of trade secrets, etc.) among the facts charged in the instant case on the ground that the instant file does not constitute trade secrets as seen below with C’s major business assets, revised the “business secrets” under this part of the facts charged into “major business assets”.

During the storage of a total of 24,377 files (hereinafter referred to as “instant files”) such as a design drawing (dwg) file “E” and a total of 24,377 files (hereinafter referred to as “instant files”), the said files were not returned to C or discarded on January 2013.

Accordingly, the Defendant in violation of the above duties thereby acquired the amount equivalent to C’s market exchange value of major business assets, and caused property damage equivalent to C.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the witness F and G in the fourth public trial record;

1. Police seizure records;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on reports on results of digital evidence analysis, protection of company secrets and competition prohibition contracts;

1. Relevant Articles of the Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

arrow