영업비밀 침해에 대한 형사규정 적용 실태 및 개선방안
A Case Analysis on the Criminal Punishment to the Trade Secret Infringement
0
조회
0
다운로드
10
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In spite of the strengthening of criminal punishment and security measures against the illegal industrial technology outflow, the number of technology leak crime has been increased consistently. This study tried to extract the practical problems and suggest the amendment alternatives for the Trade Secret Protection Law by analysing 220 criminal cases of technology outflow crime during 2007-2010. The result of analysis showed that the average period of sentences was relatively short and about 80% of imprisonment sentences was suspended the execution. That means the courts were relatively generous to the technology leak crime and there were not much common understanding on the criteria of determination of punishment. There are not many fine sentence cases and it could be derived from the difficulty of assessment of the amount of monetary damage or criminal gain. The majority of non-guilty cases were related to the concept of trade secret provided by the provisions of the Trade Secret Protection Law. To promote the efficiency of the Law and punishment, the concept of trade secret needed to be clarified and simplified through amending the Law. And the fine clause of the Law also suggested to be amended so that it was possible to sentence fine punishment without difficulty of calculating the criminal gain. In much portion of trade secret infringement cases, occupational breach of trust and infringement of a computer program copy right were concurred at the same time. This result suggests that the trend of the development of IT technology which has been influenced the means and a mode of technology outflow crime should be taken into consideration and reflected current legislation to promote efficiency of technology leak preventing legal system.
Abstract
In spite of the strengthening of criminal punishment and security measures against the illegal industrial technology outflow, the number of technology leak crime has been increased consistently. This study tried to extract the practical problems and suggest the amendment alternatives for the Trade Secret Protection Law by analysing 220 criminal cases of technology outflow crime during 2007-2010. The result of analysis showed that the average period of sentences was relatively short and about 80% of imprisonment sentences was suspended the execution. That means the courts were relatively generous to the technology leak crime and there were not much common understanding on the criteria of determination of punishment. There are not many fine sentence cases and it could be derived from the difficulty of assessment of the amount of monetary damage or criminal gain. The majority of non-guilty cases were related to the concept of trade secret provided by the provisions of the Trade Secret Protection Law. To promote the efficiency of the Law and punishment, the concept of trade secret needed to be clarified and simplified through amending the Law. And the fine clause of the Law also suggested to be amended so that it was possible to sentence fine punishment without difficulty of calculating the criminal gain. In much portion of trade secret infringement cases, occupational breach of trust and infringement of a computer program copy right were concurred at the same time. This result suggests that the trend of the development of IT technology which has been influenced the means and a mode of technology outflow crime should be taken into consideration and reflected current legislation to promote efficiency of technology leak preventing legal system.
참고문헌 (44)
- 산업스파이에 대한 형사정책적 대응체계에 관한 연구, "대검찰청", ~
- 신동운, "형법총론(제5판)" (2010), 법문사
- 임병웅, "이지특허법(제9판)" (2011), 한빛지적소유권센터
- 황의창, "부정경쟁방지 및 영업비밀보호법(5정판)" (2009), 세창출판사
- 황의창, "부정경쟁 방지 및 영업비밀 보호법" (2004), 세창출판사
- 부정경쟁방지및영업비밀보호법률중개정법률안 검토보고서, "구희권", 국회 산 업자원위원회, ~ (2004)
- 김응진, "기술유출범죄의 대응실태와 개선방안,-정부의 산업보안 정책을 중심으 로", 석사, pp.2009
- 나종갑, "營業秘密의 國際産業스파이行爲에 대한 刑事的 救濟: 美國 經濟스파이處罰法(EEA)과 不正競爭防止및營業秘密保護에관한法律을 中心으로", 통상법률, (67), pp.111~142 (2006), 법무부
- 산업스파이 수사사례 분석 및 대응방안, "남상봉", 한국산업기술보호협회 홈페 이지(www.kaits.or.kr) 자료실, ~ (2008)
- 문성식, "경제범죄에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2003
- 문희태, "우리나라 양형의 실태와 합리화방안", 박사, pp.2006
- 김민희, "개인적 법익에 대한 죄의 법정형 정비방안", 박사, pp.2011
- 박광민, "부정경쟁방지법상 영업비밀 개념의 검토", 성균관법학, 18(2), pp.413~436 (2006), 법학연구소
- 박세진, "영업비밀의 형사적 보호방안에 관한 연구", 석사, pp.2009
- 배상철, "？산업기술유출방지 및 보호에 관한 법률？상 기술유출규제를 둘러싼 논점", 산업재산권, (23), pp.131~164 (2007), 한국산업재산권법학회
- 백영준, "부정경쟁방지법상 영업비밀 보호제도 비교와 적용에 관하여-한국과 일본의 최근 개정내용을 중심으로", 창작과 권리, 43 (2006)
- 백영준, "영업비밀보호법의 適用上 限界", 산업재산권, (23), pp.37~62 (2007), 한국산업재산권법학회
- 서울경제, "기술유출방지법인가? 족쇄인가", ~ (2008)
- 부정경쟁방지법중개정법률안검토보고서, "유삼현", 국회 산업자원위원회, ~ (2009)
- 이정덕, "산업스파이범죄 관련 법률의 개선방안에 대한 연구", 형사정책, 19(2), pp.327~350 (2007), 한국형사정책학회
- 이천현, "벌금형의 규정방식에 관한 고찰", 형사정책연구, 18(3), pp.467~490 (2007), 한국형사정책연구원
- 정주환, "영업비밀침해방지제도", 법학논총, 32(2), pp.359~384 (2008), 법학연구소
- 조용순, "산업기술 유출규제에 관한 법적 고찰", 산업재산권, (21), pp.291~316 (2006), 한국산업재산권법학회
- 차상육, "영업비밀의 보호", 산업재산권, (23), pp.91~130 (2007), 한국산업재산권법학회
- 현대호, "영업비밀의 보호요건과 구제수단에 관한 법제연구", 법조, 54(8), pp.177~211 (2005), 법조협회
- 홍민지, "첨단기술의 유출방지를 위한 관련 법규의 형사법적 문제점과 개선방 안에 관한 연구", 석사, pp.2008
- 황인표, "IT분야 기술유출방지에 관한 법제도적 연구 : 첨단산업기술유출방지 및보호에관한법률안 검토를 중심으로", 석사, pp.2004
- 황철, "핵심기술의 현황 및 대응", 지식재산권연구센터 포럼자료 (2005)
- Halan, John M, "Protecting Trade Secrets: Steps Every Trade Secret Owner Should Know", Employ Relations Law Journal, 30(3) (2004)
- Lemley, Mark A, "The Surprising Virtues Of Treating Trade Secrets As IP Rights", Stanford Law Review, 61(2) (2008)
- Pacini, Carl J, "Fighting economic espionage with state trade secret laws", International Journal of Law and Management, 50(3) (2008)
- "대법원 1996.12.23. 선고 96다16605 판결", ~ (1996)
- "대법원 1998.2.13. 선고 97다24528 판결", ~ (1998)
- "대법원 1998.6.9, 선고 98다1928 판결", ~ (1998)
- "대법원 1999.3.1.2 선고 98도4704 판결", ~ (1999)
- "대법원 2003.7.16. 자 2002마4380 결정", ~ (2003)
- "대법원 2003.11.14. 선고 2002도1739 판결", ~ (2003)
- "대법원 2008.4.24. 선고 2006도9089 판결", ~ (2008)
- "대법원 2008.7.10. 선고 2008도3435 판결", ~ (2008)
- "대법원 2008.11.20. 선고 2008도5596 판결", ~ (2008)
- "대법원 2009.10.15. 선고 2008도9433 판결", ~ (2009)
- "수원지법 안산지원 2011.1.13. 선고 2010고단2014 판결", ~ (2011)
- "서울남부지법 2009.11.25. 판결 2009고단1932", ~ (2009)