영업비밀보호를 위한 경업금지와 직무발명자에 대한 정당한 보상의 관계 = Relationship between a Non-Competition Agreement for Trade-Secret Protection and Reasonable Compensation for an Employee Inventor

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Trade secrets can be classified into two categories: technical information and managemental information. Because a trade secret as technical information normally could be an employee invention, if a company enjoys profit due to such an employee invention (trade secret), regardless of patent application filing, the company should pay reasonable compensation (corresponding to said profit) to the trade secret creator (inventor) under Articles 15 and 16 of the Invention Promotion Act. Such compensation must be continuous as far as the company keeps enjoying profit, regardless of the employee's retirement.
To prevent an ex-employee from competing against the company, it may proclaim that she will inevitably disclose or exploit its trade secret. In other words, the relevant trade secret provides the company with any kind of economic profit and the competition causes damages to the profit. In that sense, we can deduce such a conclusion that the company should pay reasonable compensation (corresponding to said profit) to her (trade
secret creator, inventor). If the company has not payed such compensation, the non-payment is a good evidence that the trade secret has not provided the company with profit and there is no legal basis for the company to
file a non-competition suit. If the company files a non-competition suit admitting that there should have been compensation, it should pay reasonable compensation against so-far profit and should keep paying compensation as far as it keeps enjoying profit from the trade secret.
If amount of the compensation is nominal, the court may not approve requested non-competition. If relevant trade secret must be protected at the sacrifice of freedom of occupation, exchange of information and free
competition, it should provide the company with more than certain amount of profit. Therefore, we can conclude that, filing a non-competition suit, a company should be prepared for paying considerable compensation. So far
a company has nothing to lose upon filing a non-competition suit, in that sense, such a suit could have been misused. Such misuse may deter freedom of occupation, exchange of information and free competition. It may restrain misuse of a non-competition suit to consider reasonable compensation on a trader secret with regard to the non-competition suit. It is highly recommended that upon deciding reasonableness of a non-competition
agreement, the court consider existence of reasonable compensation as well as the value of trade secret protection and freedom of occupation.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 직무발명 및 영업비밀 개요
• Ⅲ. 영업비밀보호를 위한 경업금지의 법리
• Ⅳ. 주요국의 영업비밀보호를 위한 경업금지 법리
• Ⅴ. 영업비밀보호를 위한 경업금지와 직무발명자에 대한 정당한 보상의 관계
• Ⅵ. 결론
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 장홍선, "판례상 나타난 영업비밀침해금지기간과 전직금지기간 및 그 기간의 산정에 관하여 - 대법원 2003. 7. 16.자 2002마4380 결정" 부산판례연구회 16 : 781-848, 2005

2 신권철, "퇴직근로자 경업규제의 비교법적 고찰 - 미국과 일본의 판례를 중심으로" 서울대학교노동법연구회 (20) : 183-216, 2006

3 특허청, "직무발명제도 이렇게 바뀌었습니다"

4 장만철, "직무발명의 최근 국내 판례" 2005

5 김철환, "직무발명에 있어서의 직무해당성, 특허판례연구" 박영사 738-739, 2009

6 김준효, "직무발명 60답문" 인쇄골 39-, 2008

7 정상조, "영업비밀침해금지청구권의 시간적 범위" 5 : 392-, 2000

8 윤선희, "영업비밀에 있어서의 경영상 정보" 세창출판사 2005

9 나종갑, "영업비밀보호가 과학기술발전에 미치는 영향에 관한 법제도 연구" 법조협회 58 (58): 172-216, 2009

10 정상조, "불공정경쟁행위의 규제" 서울대학교 법학연구소 45 (45): 2004

11 나종갑, "부정경쟁방지 및 영업비밀보호에 관한 법률상의 技術상 또는 經營상의 情報의 의미" 2004

12 임종률, "노동법제8판" 박영사 336-, 2008

13 이승길, "기업의 직무발명과 그 보상에 관한 연구, 노동법연구"

14 문선영, "근로자의 직무발명과 정당한 보상에 관한 연구" 법학연구소 43 (43): 437-465, 2008

15 최정환, "근로자의 전직금지약정과 영업비밀 보호의무 - 대법원 2003. 7. 16.자 2002마4380 결정, 정보법 판례백선" 박영사 812-, 2003

16 이성호, "근로자에 대한 경업금지약정의 효력과 전직금지가처분의 허용 여부" 한림법학원 34 (34): 89-, 2001

17 나종갑, "국제 M&A 및 인력이동과 첨단산업 기술유출 방지제도 연구" 한국경영법률학회 19 (19): 75-116, 2009

18 정차호, "공동발명자 결정방법 및 공동발명자간 공헌도 산정방법 중앙법학"

19 특허청, "개정 직무발명제도"

20 특허청, "개정 발명진흥법에 따른 직무발명 보상절차 가이드라인"

21 "http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/ip_business/trade_secrets/trade_secrets.htm"

22 "http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/07/the-changing-nature-inventing-collaborative-inventing.html"

23 "http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2007/05/patent_reform_2_1.html"

24 "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-compete_agreement"

25 Ronald J. Gilson, "The Legal Infrastructure of High Technology Industrial Districts: Silicon Valley, Route 128, and Covenants Not to Compete" 74 : 607-, 1999

26 Rachel S., "Bargaining for Loyalty in the Information Age: A Reconsideration of the Role of Substantive Fairness in Enforcing Employee Noncompetes" 80 : 1163-, 2001

27 정차호, "2006년 개정 직무발명제도의 제 문제점 및 재개정방안" 세창출판사 48 : 2-34, 2007