logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.10.05 2015가단36654
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. In the building located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the Plaintiff operates a private teaching institute teaching students who wish to obtain the accounting and computer utilization ability certificate under the trade name of “D Private Teaching Institutes” (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s Private Teaching Institutes”), and the Defendant served as an instructor who educates students with a vice-president in the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute.

B. The Plaintiff entered into an employment contract with the Defendant. During the employment contract, the Plaintiff must maintain the confidential information of the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute (including the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute and the Plaintiff’s students), which it acquired on duty, even after the termination of the contract period. If the Defendant’s disclosure or use of confidential occupational information causes damage to the Plaintiff, it includes the content that the Plaintiff

C. The defendant has been in the position of leading and managing other instructors as vice presidents at the Plaintiff’s driving school, and has managed the management strategy (the time table, operating method, etc. of the Plaintiff’s driving school), the personal information (the name, contact point, and history of taking lectures) of students in the subjects of which he/she is demoted, and the lecture information (the course of taking lectures and the payment status of lecture fees, etc.) of students in the course of his/her lecture.

On March 2015, the Defendant failed to organize a Ban against new students assigned to oneself according to the course and the degree of learning, and thus violated the Plaintiff’s work instruction, and interfered with the operation of the Plaintiff’s driving school by spreading the method to the same instructors. The Defendant expressed to the Defendant that the Defendant, E and F, a volunteer instructor, who is a volunteer instructor, who acts in the same group, voluntarily, refers to the plan to set a driving school, and proposed that the Defendant work together at the next driving school.

Accordingly, the defendant intentionally or by negligence violated the duty to comply with the plaintiff's work instruction, the duty to cooperate in the progress of normal classes, and caused the problem of the plaintiff's operation of private teaching institutes.

E. The Defendant himself/herself on April 9, 2015.

arrow