logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.09.16 2015가합557423
회사에 관한 소송
Text

Defendant B, Co., Ltd., Ltd., shall either reproduce, reproduce, distribute, sell, sell, or keep the works listed in the [Attachment 1] list.

Reasons

Basic Facts

On January 22, 2008, the Plaintiff was established for the purpose of developing and selling systems and network security products.

Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) was established on June 30, 1998 for the purpose of providing security services and services, etc., and Defendant C was established on January 16, 2007 for the purpose of leasing security equipment.

Defendant D was established as Defendant B’s subsidiaries on June 1, 2012 for the purpose of providing security services and services, and was changed from Co., Ltd. to the present trade name on April 26, 2015.

F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) acquired patent rights and copyrights by means of invention and creation of the following contents:

G Patent Right of Program (hereinafter “instant patent right”) - Date of application/registration date/J / Name of invention: H date/I date: Title of invention: L program copyright (hereinafter “instant program”; “copyright of the instant program” is referred to as “instant copyright”; and “copyright of the source code of the instant program” is referred to as “copyright”) - creative date/registration date/registration date/O: M date/N date/O: Program name: LF transferred the instant patent right on February 19, 2013 to the Plaintiff, and the instant copyright on March 12, 2013.

On May 30, 2013, the Plaintiff’s creditor Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund was decided to provisionally seize the patent right of this case, and the registration of provisional seizure was completed on June 3, 2013.

The Plaintiff entered into a contract with P Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “P”) on June 13, 2013 to resolve financial difficulties caused by provisional seizure, but the P did not pay the acquisition price.

B. The representative director S of Defendant D (the trade name at the time was “stock E”) who was leased and used the instant program from the Plaintiff, and the representative director of Defendant C, and Defendant D’s representative director.

arrow