부정경쟁방지법에서의 영업비밀의 형사법적 보호
Protection of Trade Secrets under Unfair Competition Prevention Law
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Today, the importance and necessity of the protection of trade secrets for the interest is much higher. Include the background first, there is growing importance of proprietary information can be found. In some cases, the information can not be compared with the value of tangible facilities or materials. Accordingly, it is the national subject to protect trade secrets, no less than to develope technology. Secondly, Korea’s industrial structure and employment patterns are changing in knowledge-intensive type and employment type has become flowing away from the traditional, permanent occupation type. Facilitating the movement of labor across the enterprise becomes more likely to disclose trade secrets along, the proprietary information is requested by the need to protect. Finally, trade secret protection for the international system is that it is requested. To do activily Korean companies in world and to do activily foreign companies in korea, Korea’s trade secrets protection system and the international protection system is necessary to harmonize. For this end, WTO members should regulate the country’s laws protecting trade secrets in accordance with article 39 of TRIPs. Germany, in 1987, France in 1992, the United States in 1996, China 1997, Korea in 1991, Japan in 2003 to protect trade secrets, panel sanctions were introduced. However, criminal legal protection of trade secrets may be significant side effects. For example, trade secrets of the conceptual uncertainty can come from the expansion of the penalties, restrictions on freedom of changing occupation. This paper argues with The Economic Espionage Act in U.S.A, the Unfair Competition Prevention Law in, Germany and Japan, China’s Criminal Law, the Unfair Competition Prevention Law in Korea with the viewpoint of the comparative law.
Abstract
Today, the importance and necessity of the protection of trade secrets for the interest is much higher. Include the background first, there is growing importance of proprietary information can be found. In some cases, the information can not be compared with the value of tangible facilities or materials. Accordingly, it is the national subject to protect trade secrets, no less than to develope technology. Secondly, Korea’s industrial structure and employment patterns are changing in knowledge-intensive type and employment type has become flowing away from the traditional, permanent occupation type. Facilitating the movement of labor across the enterprise becomes more likely to disclose trade secrets along, the proprietary information is requested by the need to protect. Finally, trade secret protection for the international system is that it is requested. To do activily Korean companies in world and to do activily foreign companies in korea, Korea’s trade secrets protection system and the international protection system is necessary to harmonize. For this end, WTO members should regulate the country’s laws protecting trade secrets in accordance with article 39 of TRIPs. Germany, in 1987, France in 1992, the United States in 1996, China 1997, Korea in 1991, Japan in 2003 to protect trade secrets, panel sanctions were introduced. However, criminal legal protection of trade secrets may be significant side effects. For example, trade secrets of the conceptual uncertainty can come from the expansion of the penalties, restrictions on freedom of changing occupation. This paper argues with The Economic Espionage Act in U.S.A, the Unfair Competition Prevention Law in, Germany and Japan, China’s Criminal Law, the Unfair Competition Prevention Law in Korea with the viewpoint of the comparative law.
참고문헌 (11)
- 박광민, "부정경쟁방지법상 영업비밀 개념의 검토", 성균관법학, 18(2), pp.413~436 (2006), 법학연구소
- 박상열, "부정경쟁방지법에 의한 영업비밀의 형사법적 보호", 지식재산연구, 6(3), pp.103~144 (2011), 한국지식재산연구원
- 류병운, "경제스파이(Economic Espionage)로부터 영업비밀(Trade Secret)의 법적보호" (2004), 외법논집 제17집
- "사법연수원, 부정경쟁방지법, 2009", ~
- 오경식, "기업비밀침해죄-산업스파이 사건에 대하여-", 형사판례연구, (7) (1999)
- 전지연, "영업비밀의 형사법적 보호", 형사법연구, 20(4), pp.247~280 (2008), 한국형사법학회
- 최호진, "기업의 영업비밀에 대한 형사법적 보호-부정경쟁방지및영업비밀보호법을 중심으로-" (2006), 형사법연구
- "Bavendamm", Bodewig, UWG, 2004
- Michael A.Epstein, "Criminal Liability for the Misappropriation of Trade Secrets, from Roger M.Milgrim, Milgrim on Trade Screts, 1991" (1991), Milgrim on Trade Screts
- Zen Rykee, "Protection of Trade Secrets under Criminal Law" (2004)
- 只木 誠, "刑事法學における現代的課題" (2009)
