1. The part of the lower judgment regarding the external hard disks is reversed in its entirety.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment.

1. On June 1, 2010, the Defendant is in charge of the design and structure of an exclusive type of automatic machine produced in the company as a researcher at a technical research institute after becoming a victimized company C, a corporation, and being employed as a researcher at a technical research institute.

In May 2, 2011, a person who retired from office around May 22, 201 is currently engaged in D companies of the same kind as the victim company.

The crime related to the external hard disc part (1) The defendant in occupational breach of trust is an occupational duty that should not divulge relevant data to the outside, since he/she is well aware that all the drawings of exclusive machinery used by the victim company in occupational breach of trust are treated as confidential business, and that unauthorized reproduction, duplication, and removal is prohibited, and such contents are well known and prepared up to the industrial technology security angle that the trade secrets should be protected.

Nevertheless, around May 201, at the office of the technical research institute of the victimized Company E located in Changwon-si, Changwon-si, the Defendant: (a) stored exclusive small-scale design drawings of the victimized Company stored in its design computer drive in violation of its duties; (b) stored them in the hard drive with the portable external capacity type, which was as is, at the time of retirement; and (c) obtained profits equivalent to the market exchange value of the victimized Company’s trade secret without permission by removing 204,595 files in the list of crimes No. 1; and (d) did not return them to the victimized Company, thereby obtaining economic losses equivalent to the same amount as the market exchange value of the trade secret of the victimized Company.

(2) The Defendant, in violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act and occupational breach of trust, carried out any trade secret useful to the victim in the same manner as described in the preceding paragraph with the intent to obtain unjust profits or inflict damage on the victim, and left the D Company, which was a like competitor company of the victimized Company, and was in charge of designing the exclusive mechanical work from the beginning of August 201 to the point of time.