1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. From January 10, 2010 to July 31, 2013, Defendant B filed a claim against Defendant B, who retired from office at the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute and transferred to the president of the private teaching institute called E, a competitor of the same type of business as the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute, and transferred the trade secrets to instructors G, H, and I using contact details, which are trade secrets known to the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute while working at the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute. By doing so, Defendant B violated Article 10(2) of the labor contract, “The Plaintiff shall not have a status of business start-up and transfer of the same type of business with the aim of using confidential information, business information known to the Plaintiff while in office for two years from the date of his/her retirement, and the same type of business as the company’s business for the purpose of using confidential information, as liability for damages under the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act and the Civil Liability Act, and shall be liable to pay KRW 20 million.

B. Defendant C, D, and D worked as the president and the vice president of the JAC operated by the Plaintiff around February 2012. From February 2, 2012 to April 4, 2012, the Plaintiff’s act of advertising “three persons, among five persons who passed the 2012th anniversary of the five persons who passed the 201th anniversary of the 2012 Korea University,” through the Plaintiff’s website, the Plaintiff received warning from the Fair Trade Commission on June 15, 2012, on the ground that the false and the vice president advertised was advertised, and the Plaintiff ordered the employees of all the private teaching institutes, including the said JAA to immediately remove the banner stating the above advertising contents. Defendant C and D did not remove banner and did not remove the banner, and the Plaintiff’s KA received a corrective order from the Fair Trade Commission, and the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute was published on the Plaintiff’s website for eight days from October 8, 2013 to October 15, 2013.

Defendant C and D violated the duty of good faith under Article 5 of the labor contract, and protested with the legitimate instruction of the commercial parties under Article 9(6), and thereby, the Plaintiff’s trust and reputation.