[Apha Biz=(Chicago) Reporter Paul Lee] A former Samsung Electronics executive, who was indicted on charges of siphoning off the drawings of Samsung Electronics' semiconductor plant to create a cloned plant in China, denied the charges today (9th), saying, "The case was fabricated."

In the second hearing, including the alleged violation of the Industrial Technology Protection Act by Judge Lee Ji-yeon of the Criminal Chamber 14 of the Suwon District Court, A's lawyer said, "Samsung Electronics targeted the defendant who contributed greatly to Hynix's revival and revival after moving to Hynix."

"Samsung Electronics manipulated and inflated the case to prevent retirees from working in China," A said. "It is not illegal at all that the defendant tried to build a semiconductor plant."

A was accused of illegally obtaining and illegally using semiconductor factory BED, process layout, and factory design drawings, which are the business secret of Samsung Electronics, from August 2018 to February 2019.

Semiconductor factory BED is a technology to create an optimal environment where there are no impurities in the space where semiconductor manufacturing takes place.

The process layout diagram is a drawing that contains information such as the layout and area of the eight core processes for semiconductor production.

These technologies are 30nm or lower DRAM and NAND flash semiconductor process technologies, which are national core technologies.

A established a semiconductor manufacturer in Singapore in July 2015, attracted large-scale investment from Chinese Chengdu and Taiwanese electronics manufacturers, and recruited about 200 workers from the domestic semiconductor industry.

Mr. A was found to have ordered employees to obtain and use the design drawings of Samsung Electronics' semiconductor plants.

The prosecution judged that A and others committed the crime to establish a semiconductor factory modeled after Samsung Electronics just 1.5㎞ away from Samsung Electronics' semiconductor plant in Xi'an, China.

At the trial, Mr. A's lawyer and the prosecution argued over the ownership of the Samsung Electronics Xi' semiconductor plant design drawings.

The lawyer claimed, "The victim company in this case is not guilty because the prosecution is Samsung Semiconductor Limited, not Samsung Electronics, which is specified in the indictment."

On the other hand, the prosecution refuted, "This is a technology leak, not a design drawing theft case, so it has nothing to do with ownership."

 

[ⓒ AlphaBIZ. 무단전재-재배포 금지]