온라인카지노바카라사이트 사이트는 IE11이상 혹은 타 브라우저에서
정상적으로 구동되도록 구현되었습니다.
익스플로러 10 이하버전에서는 브라우저 버전 업데이트 혹은
엣지, 크롬, 사파리등의 다른 브라우저로 접속을 부탁드립니다. 감사합니다.
익스플로러 10 이하버전에서는 브라우저 버전 업데이트 혹은
엣지, 크롬, 사파리등의 다른 브라우저로 접속을 부탁드립니다. 감사합니다.
1. Overview of the case
K is a company that developed a waterproof adhesive for cell phones that was almost exclusively used in all models of waterproof cell phones manufactured by Samsung Electronics. T hired J, an employee of K, to acquire the 바카라 게임 사이트 for K's waterproof adhesive for cell phones (the "바카라 게임 사이트"). Afterward, T began developing and selling a waterproof adhesive for cell phones named "OOO" (the "mass-produced product").
Under these circumstances, K claimed that the mass-produced product in this case was an infringement of its trade secrets manufactured using the 바카라 게임 사이트 (which is a trade secret), and sought an injunction against T to prohibit the manufacture, consignment, and sale of the mass-produced product in this case, as well as damages.
2. Issues in the case
The case was fiercely contested on a number of issues, including (1) whether the 바카라 게임 사이트 in the case was a trade secret as defined in Article 2(2) of the Act on Prevention of Unfair Competition and Protection of Trade Secrets, (2) whether T used the 바카라 게임 사이트 to develop the mass-produced product, and (3) the amount of damages caused to K due to T's alleged infringement of its trade secrets.
3. Our role
T argued that K's 바카라 게임 사이트 did not meet the non-disclosure requirement because it fell within the scope of technical ideas disclosed in numerous patent publications, that the 바카라 게임 사이트 of the mass-produced product was not the same as the 바카라 게임 사이트 at issue, and that it was clear that T did not use K's 바카라 게임 사이트 at issue. T also repeatedly cited the fact that it had been acquitted in a related criminal judgment.
On behalf of K, we pointed out that all of T's arguments were unreasonable and contrary to the relevant 바카라 게임 사이트. In particular, we succeeded in obtaining the manufacturing method of the mass-produced product at issue, which was secretly managed by T, and directly proved that the manufacturing method of the mass-produced product at issue was developed by using K's manufacturing method at issue.
4. Court judgment
On September 12, 2023, the Cheonan Branch of the Daejeon District Court clearly recognized that T's mass-produced product in this case was a product infringing on K's trade secrets that was developed by using K's 바카라 게임 사이트, ordered T to pay damages, and rejected all of T's arguments based on the appraisal results and the related criminal judgment (Daejeon District Court Cheonan Branch Decision 2020Gahap100980 dated September 12, 2023).
5. Implications
In order to effectively find out the other party's technical information that the other party is reluctant to disclose on the ground that it is a trade secret, and to reliably prove that the other party's technical information is developed by using the trade secret of the trade secret holder, it is necessary not only to be familiar with the legal doctrine of trade secret infringement, but also to establish a strategy to effectively prove the infringement of trade secrets through the means recognized by 바카라 게임 사이트 within the litigation process.
□Attorney in charge: Jung Young-hun and Han Tae-young
