我國侵害營業秘密與競業禁止違約判決之量化研究 Quantitative Analysis of the ROC Court Decisions on Trade Secret Infringements and Violation of Non-Compete Clauses

營業秘密法生效迄今十年，其對於營業秘密的保護是否已周延？實有待觀察。又離職後競業禁止約款之相關實務運作現況為何？亦為探討營業秘密保護議題時，無法切割之問題。 本文利用司法院之系統查詢我國地方法院自1999 年8 月1 日起至2006年6 月30 日止，侵害營業秘密或違反競業禁止約款之民事判決，並以量化分析方式探討司法實務之態度。 本文之量化分析顯示：營業秘密與競業禁止訴訟之勝率均偏低；主張違反競業禁止明顯比主張侵害營業秘密來得容易；兩類訴訟之平均審理時間恐無法因應其急迫性需求；未約定違反競業禁止約款之違約賠償罰則的敗訴機率極高；競業禁止約款之五原則在法院實務上並未被遵守等。本文希望透過上開發現與確認，能期待找出改善之道。 The ROC Trade Secret Act has come into force for 10 years. However, whether it has sufficiently protected the trade secrets remains unanswered. In addition, the current operation and practice of “Non-Compete Clauses after Employment Relationship” are also important issues while discussing the trade secrets issues. Through the database of the ROC Judicial Yuan, we reviewed all the cases in the ROC district courts in connection with infringements on trade secrets and breach of non-compete clauses from August 1, 1999 to June 30, 2006 and conducted quantitative analysis of the courts’ opinions in this regard. The results of our quantitative analysis show that: 1. most of the decisions related to trade secret infringements and breach of non-compete clauses are in favor of defendants; 2. it is easier to claim violation of the non-compete clauses than infringements on trade secrets; 3. the trial period is too long to protect the plaintiffs given that the time is of essence; 4. it is quite probable that plaintiffs will lose the lawsuits if no penalty clause for breach of non-compete obligations is provided in advance; and 5. the five rules to non-compete clauses are not strictly followed by district courts. Through the above findings, we look forward to finding better solutions to protect the trade secrets