beta
Text
Defendant
A, B, and D shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months, and by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.
except that from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
To the extent that it does not interfere with the defendants' exercise of their right of defense, criminal facts were organized as follows.
1. Defendant A stated in the facts charged around December 1, 201 as the facts charged on or around November 201. However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, this appears to be a clerical error, and even if it is corrected without any changes in the indictment, it does not seem to be a substantial obstacle to the exercise of the right to defense of the above Defendant. Accordingly, it shall be corrected ex officio.
From to July 15, 2012, in charge of the quality control and authorization of the research institute in the World-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Investment Bank (hereinafter referred to as the "victim company") in the MRI (hereinafter referred to as the "Magticson") and the person who has been engaged in the overall management of the quality control and certification of the damage company.
The defendant, while working in a victimized company, has prepared a security pledge containing the contents of the company's research and development plan, work report, experimental data, research outcomes and analysis data, technical information, such as product design method, design drawings, manufacturing process, manufacturing process, manufacturing device, computer program related to consulting business, etc., and all management information, etc. related to consulting business, such as returning all trade secrets of the company currently employed at the time of retirement to a third party. In addition, the defendant has an occupational duty to return, discard, and not divulge such data when he/she retires from office in accordance with the duty of incidental duty under the employment contract or the duty of good faith principle. Accordingly, the defendant has a duty to refrain from shipping, divulging, and using the major business assets of the victimized company acquired at the time of retirement.
Nevertheless, the Defendant retired from a damaged company on July 15, 2012 and violated the above duties.