logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.04.25 2016가단211112
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff is an operator of “C” that produces gold materials, and the Defendant is a person who works for “C” from October 12, 2010 to September 30, 2013.

B. On August 12, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the development of gold materials with the non-party Amera Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “non-party A”) (hereinafter “non-party A”).

As between August 13, 2012 and December 30, 2012, the Plaintiff invested KRW 75,000,000 and developed special gold-type materials.

The kinds of chemical ingredients and the ratio of amount with regard to the foregoing gold-type materials shall constitute trade secrets under Article 2 subparagraph 2 of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act.

C. On September 24, 2013, the Defendant stolen ambco 21 (the Plaintiff was generated in the process of processing the aforesaid special gold materials, and the Plaintiff invested in the cost of KRW 75,000,000 and the special gold-type materials developed by investing a half-month amount for four months, and used it in exchange for a new product by bringing the Plaintiff to the Nonparty company. The same applies to the Plaintiff’s divulgence of the special gold-type materials created by the Plaintiff’s trade secrets to the outside.

The defendant, for his own interest, stolen the plaintiff's trade secret 21, which is embodied in the plaintiff's trade secret in order to develop the same location as that of the special gold-type developed by the plaintiff, and analyzed it and acquired the plaintiff's trade secret.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the money stated in the claim as compensation for business damage suffered by the plaintiff due to the above illegal act (act of trade secret).

2. In full view of the judgment and conclusion of Gap evidence Nos. 2 and Eul evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2, the defendant, from the C's work room on September 24, 2013, stolen 15kg of sludge generated in the process of ambaco21 processing by using the gap in which the plaintiff was on a foreign business trip and received 50,000 won from the D company.

arrow