logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.11.11 2016고단3229
부정경쟁방지및영업비밀보호에관한법률위반(영업비밀누설등)
Text

The defendant shall publicly announce the summary of the judgment against the defendant not guilty.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is the chief of the management support office of the victim Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Company”) which is the second partner of the victim Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Company”).

No person shall acquire or use trade secrets or divulge them to a third party for the purpose of obtaining improper profits or inflicting damage on the owner of the trade secrets.

On May 11, 2016, at the office of FF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), the primary partner of the victim company E (hereinafter “F”), the Defendant acquired the “new development schedule” of the victim company, which is the trade secret of the victim company, from G, its employee, and then disclosed the trade secret of the victim company to a third party by printing the said new development schedule in the office of H around 16:10 on May 26, 2016, for the purpose of causing damage to the victim company.

2. Determination

A. The crime of divulgence of trade secrets under the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (hereinafter “Unfair Competition Prevention Act”) is a crime committed with the purpose of “the purpose of obtaining unjust profits or causing damage to a trade secret holder” as an element for establishing a crime. The purpose of the crime lies in dolusence even if the purpose is not a positive or conclusive perception. The issue of whether the purpose was intended should be determined reasonably in light of social norms by taking into account various circumstances, such as the defendant’s occupation, experience, motive and circumstance of the act, method and method of the act, and relationship between the person holding the trade secret and the third party who acquired the

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do391 Decided April 12, 2012, etc.). B.

The record reveals the following facts and circumstances.

(1) The Defendant, as the second partner of the victim company, is D as the head of the management support office of D and the representative director of D.

arrow