As leaks of core national industrial technologies such as semiconductors and displays continue, the share of technology-leak offenders receiving suspended sentences has risen over the past three years. Lenient sentencing by the courts is cited as the main reason, but analysts say the growing sophistication of leak methods has also made the crimes harder to prove. With the investigative framework itself changing after the abolition of the Prosecution Service, there are calls to urgently strengthen specialized investigative capacity.
According to the Supreme Court's judicial yearbook released on the 19th, 34 defendants received prison terms in first-trial rulings on violations of the Industrial Technology Protection Act and the Unfair Competition Prevention Act last year, while 77 received suspended sentences. Of the 111 defendants given custodial sentences, 69.4% had them suspended, the highest share since 2022. The ratio fell from 76% in 2021 to 47% in 2023, then rose for two straight years to 61% in 2024 and 69% last year. The number of defendants in technology-leak cases also grew to 202 last year from 175 in 2021. Over the past five years, the suspended-sentence share stands at 65.5%, far above the 50% rate for cases in general.
Prosecuting a technology-leak case requires specific proof of the technical value of the leaked information, whether it falls under legal protection, and the defendant's role in the leak. The more advanced the technology, the more complex it is, demanding considerable expertise to determine whether a leak was illegal. In July, the Seoul Central District Court rejected the detention warrants sought against former Samsung Display employees accused of leaking organic light-emitting diode (OLED) design drawings to a Chinese company. "Courts recognize the gravity of technology-leak crimes, but it remains difficult to prove the facts of the offense to a degree that justifies detention or a prison term," a legal official said.
Disputes over whether leaked technology qualifies for legal protection are also common. Seven people, including a former employee of IsMedia, a maker of camera module inspection equipment, were indicted in 2022 on charges of leaking technology to a foreign company. The key issue at trial was whether the leaked technology fell under legal protection, and prosecutors' arguments were rejected in the appellate ruling last year and again by the Supreme Court in January. "It is not easy even to prove that the leaked information qualifies as industrial technology protected under the law," a legal official said.
In September, a revised Article 98 of the Criminal Act took effect, expanding the scope of espionage charges from an "enemy state" to "a foreign country or an equivalent organization," broadening the legal basis for punishing industrial spies. Still, precedents are scarce, and prosecutors must prove whether the leaked technology constitutes a state secret and whether the elements of espionage are met.
A shortage of specialized investigators and analytical infrastructure is another problem. Technology-leak crimes require not only an understanding of advanced industries but also expertise in digital forensics and tracing overseas funds. With the abolition of the Prosecution Service, however, direct investigations by the new Public Prosecution Office are no longer possible, and prosecutors experienced in technology-leak cases have moved to other units, raising concerns that investigative know-how could be lost. "In the past, we could suggest that a case be assigned to a prosecutor or team familiar with the technology, but that has become difficult," a business community official said.
In August, the police added 79 officers dedicated to technology-leak cases and decided to expand the industrial technology security investigation units at the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency and the Gyeonggi Nambu Provincial Police Agency. Next year, the ceiling on reward payments for tipoffs will rise to 300 million won from 5 million won. Last year, technology-leak cases totaled 179 and 378 people were arrested, up 45.5% and 41.5%, respectively, from a year earlier. Cases involving leaks abroad reached 33.
Strengthening investigative capacity will also require closer cooperation among agencies. With the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy moving to introduce special judicial police, cooperation with the Public Prosecution Office has become important in seeking warrants for compulsory investigations. Some argue that a joint investigation framework for technology leaks should be built to support evidence gathering and legal review. "The country needs to pool its efforts against technology-leak crimes," a police official said. "We need an organization such as a joint investigation unit where the special judicial police, the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency and the police can work together."