1. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months, and a fine of 15 million won;

Defendant

A does not pay the above fine.

Punishment of the crime

Victim C was listed on the KOSDAQ market in 2010, which was established in 1976 as a specialized production company of electronic materials for display, and as one of the main products of the victimized Company, the injured Company has invested research and development expenses for a multi-year period of time and has secured excellent results in preparing for competitors and sold products to customers E, etc.

In order to prevent leakage of trade secrets, the injured company requested the trade secret protection pledge, information security pledge, etc. from its employees, prepared the trade secret protection rules differentiated and specifically for trade secrets, such as extreme expenses, external expenses, inside and outside, and the general public, and prepared the trade secret management regulations. Documents prepared on the intra-company computer network have immediately been encrypted and stored in the security computer network, and the records have been stored in the security computer network, monitor the use of Internet e-mail, and take measures for trade secret management such as restricting the access authority to the department in charge.

Defendant

On April 4, 2011, A was employed by the victimized Company and then left the office on October 31, 201 and July 14, 2017 after re-admission on July 4, 2016. Defendant B was employed by the victimized Company on March 22, 2010, and then retired from the office on November 30, 2014.

1. The Defendants’ co-principal

A. Around August 2014, Defendant A received a proposal from G working for “F” (hereinafter “F”) at the time of the movement of China (hereinafter “F”) to the effect that “D, a product of the same kind, is entered in China with a person who will manufacture and sell the products of the same kind as C stock company in China, and transferred the content thereof to Defendant B, the developer, and thereafter, the Defendants offered D-related technologies of the victimized company by leaving their jobs to F.