Former Samsung Electronics vice president An Seung-ho, charged with leaking internal confidential documents to support a patent lawsuit against the company, was handed a three-year prison sentence on appeal and immediately arrested on the 27th. Two former Samsung staff members accused of disclosing the firm’s patent-related trade secrets were each given enhanced sentences of one year. The court emphasized, “Society must be warned against betraying corporate trust for personal profit through the unauthorized release of trade secrets.”
Seoul High Court Criminal Division 3 (Presiding Judge Lee Seung-han) sentenced An, prosecuted under the Unfair Competition Prevention Act for revealing trade secrets, to three years—matching the initial trial verdict. Lee Mo, a former head of Samsung Display’s patent application team accused of leaking Samsung’s patent-related information, received four years in prison and a fine of 532 million won. Another ex-employee from Samsung Electronics’ IP Center, also named Lee Mo, was sentenced to three years. Their original sentences had been three and two years, respectively.
An led Samsung Electronics’ IP Center from 2010 to 2018, managing all patent-related operations, before establishing his own patent management company, Synergy IP, after leaving Samsung. In 2024, he was indicted for allegedly obtaining internal Samsung reports about patents held by U.S.-based Tekiya, sharing them with employees at his new firm, and using the materials in legal actions and negotiations targeting Samsung.
An’s legal team filed a lawsuit in a U.S. court together with Tekiya, alleging Samsung violated their patents. However, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas dismissed Tekiya’s claim, citing that the confidential Samsung materials were improperly obtained and used. Tekiya initially appealed but later dropped the appeal following a settlement agreement with Samsung.
The contested documents included detailed assessments of 18 cases involving Tekiya’s patents—covering their relevance to Samsung products, grounds for invalidation, and litigation and negotiation strategies. An argued these materials weren’t trade secrets, but the appellate court upheld the lower court’s decision: “Samsung’s internal analyses and strategic responses are legally recognized as trade secrets.” The court further ruled that employing such internally derived analysis and negotiation tactics in lawsuits against the company “does not constitute a legitimate exercise of patent rights.”
Meanwhile, Lee, a former employee of Samsung’s IP Center, was accused of leaking sensitive data to Fujifilm during patent sale talks with Samsung Display. During the appeal, Lee claimed, “I simply stated the patents had little value to Fujifilm, and since Samsung Display bought them at a low price, there was no malicious intent.” The court rejected this defense, calling it “merely clever wordplay without substance.” While increasing the penalties for Lee and others, the court reiterated, “A clear societal warning is needed against exploiting trade secrets gained during employment for personal gain, especially when it harms the company.”
Leave a Reply