A former Samsung E&A (formerly Samsung Engineering) employee who leaked "ultrapure water (UPW)" technology used in Samsung Electronics' semiconductor manufacturing process to China appears likely to face a harsher penalty than the appellate ruling. The Supreme Court found that this technology constitutes industrial technology and ruled it should be punished under the Industrial Technology Protection Act.
The Supreme Court's Second Division (presiding Justice Kwon Young-jun) on the 14th overturned a lower court's sentence of three years in prison and remanded the case to the Seoul Central District Court in the final appeal of former Samsung E&A employee A, who was indicted on charges of violating the Industrial Technology Protection Act, violating the Unfair Competition Prevention Act (disclosing trade secrets, disclosing trade secrets overseas, etc.), and breach of duty.
Ultrapure water is highly purified water from which minerals, particulates, bacteria, microorganisms, and dissolved gases have been removed. It is mainly used for cleaning in semiconductor manufacturing, such as washing away debris left on wafers after etching or removing ions remaining after ion implantation. Stable supply of ultrapure water is closely related to mass-production Production yield in semiconductors.
In 2018, Samsung E&A installed an eco-friendly ultrapure water system that does not use toxic chemicals in the ultrapure water production process at Samsung Electronics' Hwaseong semiconductor plant.
A joined Samsung E&A in July 2011 and was responsible for managing installation of the ultrapure water system and liaising with the client. A resigned in Feb. 2019 to move to the Chinese semiconductor consulting firm "Jinsemi." Jinsemi was founded by a person surnamed Choi, a former Samsung Electronics executive. Choi, serving as the head of "Chengdu Gaozhen," a joint venture established by Jinsemi and China's Chengdu city, was indicted and detained in Sept. 2024 on charges of leaking Samsung Electronics' DRAM process technology.
A was indicted on charges of leaking company trade secrets between Jan. and Feb. 2019, including ultrapure water system design drawings and equipment specifications (standards). A took printed materials from the company to keep at home. A also faces charges of handing over trade secrets such as an ultrapure water system operation manual and construction improvement materials at the request of another engineer, B. B, who received the trade secrets, was also brought to trial.
At trial, most of the charges against the two were found guilty, and A was sentenced to three years in prison, while B received two years in prison, suspended for three years. B did not appeal, and the sentence was finalized. The appellate court dismissed both A's and the prosecutor's appeals.
However, the first and second trials found A not guilty of violating the Industrial Technology Protection Act. They said it was difficult to recognize semiconductor ultrapure water technology as falling within the scope of advanced technologies listed in the notice by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Resources. As grounds, they cited that the "freshwater" field among the enumerated advanced technologies refers to seawater desalination technology, while semiconductor ultrapure water technology falls under industrial water treatment technology.
The Supreme Court found that this lower court determination was wrong. The court said, "In that classification, the meaning of 'freshwater' is a concept that includes cases where the purpose of use of the treated water is such that the type of the source water is freshwater."
The Supreme Court reaffirmed the legal principle that "whether certain information constitutes industrial technology protected under the Industrial Technology Protection Act must be determined concretely and individually, taking into comprehensive consideration whether, through that information, the target entity can contribute to industrial development and possess industrial competitiveness."