Original Sentence Upheld

A close-up image of the side of a smartphone glass surface on which 3D lamination technology is used to bond the glass with the OLED panel beneath.
A close-up image of the side of a smartphone glass surface on which 3D lamination technology is used to bond the glass with the OLED panel beneath.

The former CEO and several employees of TopTec who sold Samsung Display’s edge panel technology to China, have been convicted. The leaked 3D Lamination technology is used to manufacture edge panels, also known as “edge designs,” smartphone displays designed to curve at the edge.

The Supreme Court today (July 13) upheld the original sentence of 3 years imprisonment for the former TopTec CEO, known as Mr. A, who was indicted on charges of violating the Industrial Technology Protection Act.

Two executives, including Mr. B from TopTec, were each confirmed to serve 2 years in prison. Another executive was sentenced to a 4-year suspended sentence with a 2-year probation, three employees each received a 2-year suspended sentence with a 1-year probation, and two other employees were fined 10 million won each. TopTec and another company were each fined 100 million won (US$78,896).

They were indicted on charges of leaking the specifications and panel drawings of flexible OLED edge panel 3D lamination, which they received from Samsung in April 2018, to the companies they established, and then passing some of them to two Chinese companies.

Between May and August of the same year, they manufactured 24 sets of 3D lamination equipment based on the drawings they received from Samsung, exported 16 sets to Chinese companies, and were charged with attempting to export the remaining 8 sets. The court of first instance ruled them all not guilty, arguing that the information they leaked was not a trade secret.

However, the second instance court overturned this decision, saying, “The technology in question in this case is a ‘cutting-edge technology’ designated by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy and is hard to call public information.” The court said, “The defendants had an obligation to keep trade secrets under a contract or implicit agreement and it is illegal to leak them to Chinese companies.”

Both defendants and prosecutors appealed, but the Supreme Court deemed the second-instance ruling valid and dismissed all appeals.

Copyright © BusinessKorea. Prohibited from unauthorized reproduction and redistribution