{"id":73,"date":"2025-07-18T06:55:59","date_gmt":"2025-07-18T06:55:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/?p=73"},"modified":"2026-06-18T11:08:04","modified_gmt":"2026-06-18T11:08:04","slug":"attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/","title":{"rendered":"[Attorney Taejin Kim&#8217;s Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership &#8211; Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><!-- ATLAS_HREFLANG_START -->\n<link rel=\"alternate\" hreflang=\"en\" href=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/\" \/>\n<link rel=\"alternate\" hreflang=\"x-default\" href=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/\" \/>\n<!-- ATLAS_HREFLANG_END --><br \/>\n<!-- ATLAS_SEO_BLOCK_START --><script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/#article\",\"headline\":\"[Attorney Taejin Kim's Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership - Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners\",\"description\":\"Trade Secret Series 5 \u2014 Korean breach of trust analysis.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-07-18\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-03\",\"author\":{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en\/taejin-kim-en\/#person\",\"name\":\"Taejin Kim\",\"jobTitle\":\"Managing Partner\",\"worksFor\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/#legalservice\"}},\"publisher\":{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/#legalservice\",\"name\":\"Atlas Legal\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en\/home-en\/\"},\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/\"},\"about\":[\"Korean trade secret breach of trust\",\"Korean Criminal Act \u00a7356 occupational breach of trust\",\"Trade secret series 5\",\"Korean criminal liability\"]}<\/script><script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"FAQPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/#faq\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"mainEntity\":[{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Where is Atlas Legal located?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Atlas Legal is located at B-2901, Centroad, 323 Incheontower-daero, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon (Songdo International Business District, IFEZ). Postal code 22007.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"What languages does Atlas Legal serve clients in?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Atlas Legal serves clients in Korean and English. We routinely advise foreign-invested companies based in Songdo, Cheongna, and Yeongjong International Cities (IFEZ).\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"What practice areas does Atlas Legal cover?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Atlas Legal advises on Korean corporate law, shareholder and director disputes, international contracts under Korean law, corporate rehabilitation and bankruptcy under the Korean Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, criminal defense for corporate matters, and trade secret protection.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"How can a foreign-invested company in Songdo IFEZ contact Atlas Legal?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Foreign-invested companies in Songdo, Cheongna, or Yeongjong International Cities can contact Atlas Legal at +82-32-864-8300 or info@atlaw.kr. Office hours are Monday to Friday, 09:00-18:00 KST.\"}}]}<\/script><script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":[\"LegalService\",\"Service\"],\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/#legalservice\",\"name\":\"Atlas Legal\",\"alternateName\":[\"Atlas Law Firm\",\"Atlas Legal (formerly K&P)\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en\/home-en\/\",\"telephone\":\"+82-32-864-8300\",\"email\":\"info@atlaw.kr\",\"priceRange\":\"\u20a9\u20a9\u20a9\",\"address\":{\"@type\":\"PostalAddress\",\"streetAddress\":\"323 Incheontower-daero, B-2901 (Songdo-dong, Centroad)\",\"addressLocality\":\"Yeonsu-gu, Incheon\",\"addressRegion\":\"Incheon Metropolitan City\",\"postalCode\":\"22007\",\"addressCountry\":\"KR\"},\"geo\":{\"@type\":\"GeoCoordinates\",\"latitude\":37.399438,\"longitude\":126.629812},\"openingHoursSpecification\":[{\"@type\":\"OpeningHoursSpecification\",\"dayOfWeek\":[\"Monday\",\"Tuesday\",\"Wednesday\",\"Thursday\",\"Friday\"],\"opens\":\"09:00\",\"closes\":\"18:00\"}],\"areaServed\":[{\"@type\":\"Country\",\"name\":\"South Korea\"},{\"@type\":\"AdministrativeArea\",\"name\":\"Incheon Metropolitan City\"},{\"@type\":\"AdministrativeArea\",\"name\":\"Seoul Special City\"},{\"@type\":\"AdministrativeArea\",\"name\":\"Gyeonggi Province\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"Songdo International Business District (IFEZ)\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"Cheongna International City (IFEZ)\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"Yeongjong International City (IFEZ)\"}],\"knowsAbout\":[\"Korean corporate law\",\"Korean Commercial Act\",\"Korean Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act\",\"International contracts under Korean law\",\"Songdo IFEZ business legal services\"],\"knowsLanguage\":[\"en\",\"ko\"],\"founder\":{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en\/taejin-kim-en\/#person\"}}<\/script><!-- ATLAS_SEO_BLOCK_END --><\/p>\n<div class=\"content-container\">\n<div class=\"toc\">\n<h2>Table of Contents<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"#section1\">1. Relationship with Breach of Trust<\/a>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"#section1-1\">&#8211; Trade Secret Infringement and Breach of Trust Application<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section1-2\">&#8211; Fundamental Legal Principles of Breach of Trust<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section1-3\">&#8211; Trade Secret Leak and Breach of Trust Establishment<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section1-4\">&#8211; Accomplice Liability of Competing Companies<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section1-5\">&#8211; Trade Secret Protection Law Amendment and Breach of Trust<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section1-6\">&#8211; Systematic Issues in Unfair Competition Prevention Act<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section2\">2. Joint Ownership of Trade Secrets<\/a>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"#section2-1\">&#8211; Requirements for Joint Ownership Recognition<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section2-2\">&#8211; Legal Nature of Joint Ownership Relationship<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section2-3\">&#8211; Self-Use Rights of Joint Owners<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section2-4\">&#8211; Balance with Unfair Competition Prevention Act Purpose<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#section3\">3. Conclusion<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<h2 id=\"section1\">1. Relationship with Breach of Trust<\/h2>\n<h3 id=\"section1-1\">Trade Secret Infringement and Breach of Trust Application<\/h3>\n<p>Due to certain limitations in the current criminal elements of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act, legal practice has actively utilized the property crime of breach of trust under the Criminal Act for more effective criminal punishment.<\/p>\n<p>Case law holds that technical information must possess non-disclosure, utility, and confidentiality management requirements to be protected as trade secrets. However, even if such information does not fully meet these requirements and does not constitute trade secrets, if the information possesses non-disclosure and utility and constitutes important business assets, breach of trust may be established.<\/p>\n<p>In other words, even in cases where protection is not available under the Trade Secret Protection Act, punishment through breach of trust is possible through the concept of &#8216;important business assets&#8217; according to case law.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"section1-2\">Fundamental Legal Principles of Breach of Trust<\/h3>\n<p>The essence of breach of trust is considered to be a violation of the duty of good faith or breach of trust relationship, which is the position of Korean legal theory and case law.<\/p>\n<p>The elements of breach of trust are as follows:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The actor must be &#8216;one who handles another&#8217;s affairs&#8217;<\/li>\n<li>Performance of &#8216;acts contrary to duty&#8217;<\/li>\n<li>Occurrence of &#8216;property damage and benefit acquisition&#8217;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>However, there is a view that strict interpretation is necessary as extreme application of the breach theory may lead to unlimited expansion of the constituent elements.<\/p>\n<p>Whether a former employee was in the position of &#8216;one who handles another&#8217;s affairs&#8217; in breach of trust should be determined by comprehensively considering the timing of resignation, motives, circumstances of document leakage, and content.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"section1-3\">Trade Secret Leak and Breach of Trust Establishment<\/h3>\n<p>A corporate employee who knows trade secrets and can use them should already be considered to have acquired the relevant trade secrets. Therefore, when such a person simply removes trade secrets from the company without authorization, while it may constitute breach of trust, it does not correspond to the &#8216;acquisition&#8217; of trade secrets specified in the relevant provisions.<\/p>\n<p>According to case law, even if a company employee lawfully removes trade secrets or important business assets and such removal does not constitute breach of trust, if there is an obligation to return or delete such trade secrets upon resignation but fails to return or delete them with the purpose of leaking to competitors or using for personal benefit, such conduct constitutes breach of trust.<\/p>\n<p>Even in cases of lawful removal for business purposes, there must be a breach-related purpose of &#8216;leaking to competitors or using for personal benefit&#8217; for breach of trust to be established. This breach-related purpose is subjective and difficult to confirm, and often the improper purpose is inferred from subsequent objective acts such as actual leakage or use.<\/p>\n<p>&#8216;Important business assets&#8217; means assets that are not disclosed to an unspecified number of people, were created by the employer with considerable time, effort, and cost, and through their use, competitive advantages can be gained over competitors. Important business assets, similar to trade secrets, require non-disclosure and economic value, but differ in that confidentiality management is not an essential requirement.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"section1-4\">Accomplice Liability of Competing Companies<\/h3>\n<p>When a competing company hires an experienced employee, if they are unaware that the employee uses trade secrets from the previous company, no crime is established for the hiring company.<\/p>\n<p>However, if hiring the experienced employee was a means to acquire trade secrets from the previous company for use in their own business, the competing company may also be seen as actively participating in the breach of trust acts of the hired employee and could be liable as an accomplice to breach of trust.<\/p>\n<p>Since breach of trust is a dual status crime, if a competing company without status relationship conspires with someone with such status relationship to commit breach of trust, according to the proviso of Article 33 of the Criminal Act, they should be punished according to the penalties prescribed for simple breach of trust.<\/p>\n<p>A competing company that participates in non-punishable subsequent acts of a company employee (e.g., use of trade secrets after resignation) may become an accomplice to breach of trust, and depending on the degree of participation, may be punished as an accessory even if not a co-principal.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"section1-5\">Trade Secret Protection Law Amendment and Breach of Trust<\/h3>\n<p>Past case law strictly interpreted the &#8216;confidentiality management&#8217; requirement, resulting in a considerable number of cases that could not be protected as trade secrets, leading to criticism and the need to relax the confidentiality management requirement.<\/p>\n<p>Recent legal amendments have been continuously made to strengthen trade secret protection by relaxing the confidentiality management requirement. These amendments may expand the scope of recognition as trade secrets.<\/p>\n<p>Some suggest the need to limitedly apply breach of trust in trade secret infringement cases. This is related to various legal issues that arise when trade secret infringement cases are prosecuted under breach of trust.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"section1-6\">Systematic Issues in Unfair Competition Prevention Act<\/h3>\n<p>The Unfair Competition Prevention Act has inconsistencies between the unfair competition prevention and trade secret protection systems as parts related to trade secret protection were added contrary to the original legislative intent. There are particularly imbalance issues between the civil liability section and the criminal liability section of the penalty provisions.<\/p>\n<p>While the Unfair Competition Prevention Act specifically enumerates trade secret infringement acts (civil), the penalty provisions stipulate acquisition, use, and disclosure to third parties of trade secrets as criminal elements, which may not align with civil infringement acts.<\/p>\n<p>Depending on the interpretation of punishment provisions, the scope of application may be broader than civil liability targets. This approach creates imbalance between civil and criminal liability and may violate the principle of supplementarity in criminal law.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"section2\">2. Joint Ownership of Trade Secrets<\/h2>\n<h3 id=\"section2-1\">Requirements for Joint Ownership Recognition<\/h3>\n<p>For trade secrets produced and developed through joint research by multiple entities, if the ownership is not determined by separate agreement, relevant court decisions have held that such trade secrets jointly belong to research and development entities that made &#8216;substantial contributions&#8217; to the production and development process.<\/p>\n<p>Representative cases include Supreme Court Decision 2021Da289399, Supreme Court Decision 2023Do4058, and Seoul High Court Decision 2020Na2038172 dated September 9, 2021, which took this position.<\/p>\n<p>&#8216;Substantial contribution&#8217; is determined by whether there was concrete and substantial technical contribution such as provision of source technology and manufacturing technology, presentation of detailed specifications, design work, drawing creation, performance testing, presentation of improvements, and provision of other experience and know-how. Development cost burden may also be considered. This is similar to the criteria for joint invention.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"section2-2\">Legal Nature of Joint Ownership Relationship<\/h3>\n<p>Relevant court decisions have held that the legal relationship between joint owners of trade secrets is governed by analogous application of civil law provisions on joint ownership, and the legal nature corresponds to (quasi-)ownership under civil law. Unlike patent law, the Unfair Competition Prevention Act has no provisions regarding joint ownership and its legal nature.<\/p>\n<p>In Supreme Court Decision 2021Da289399, the Supreme Court specified that when there is no separate agreement, trade secrets jointly belong to substantial contributors, and civil law principles of joint ownership apply between joint owners.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"section2-3\">Self-Use Rights of Joint Owners<\/h3>\n<p>There is scholarly debate regarding whether consent from other joint owners is required when one joint owner uses trade secrets independently:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>&#8216;Consent Required Theory&#8217; &#8211; consent is necessary<\/li>\n<li>&#8216;Consent Unnecessary Theory&#8217; (or unlimited theory) &#8211; consent is not necessary<\/li>\n<li>&#8216;Compromise Theory&#8217; &#8211; consent is not necessary within certain limits<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Recent lower court decisions have mainly adopted the <strong>&#8216;Compromise Theory&#8217;<\/strong>. Seoul High Court Decision 2020Na2038172 dated September 9, 2021, and decisions 2020Na2016653 and 2038875 of the same date held that one joint owner of trade secrets may freely use the entirety within the scope that does not cause loss of trade secret nature.<\/p>\n<p>The original court decision of Supreme Court Decision 2023Do4058, the Suwon High Court decision, also held that self-use by joint owners is possible if it does not cause loss of confidentiality.<\/p>\n<p>According to the &#8216;Compromise Theory&#8217;, if a joint owner must reasonably provide technical information to a third party for the purpose of implementing the technical information, provision to third parties may also be included in the scope of self-use if confidentiality is maintained by imposing confidentiality obligations.<\/p>\n<p>Seoul High Court Decision 2020Na2038172 dated September 9, 2021, held that &#8220;it is possible not only when joint owners directly implement technical information, but also when they must reasonably provide technical information to third parties for the purpose of implementing the technical information, by imposing confidentiality obligations to maintain trade secret nature.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Under the current industrial structure where division of labor and specialization are common, subcontracting and supply methods are frequent, so the view that only pure self-use cases constitute legitimate self-use does not align with reality.<\/p>\n<p>Meanwhile, Supreme Court Decision 2016Da8503 dated June 9, 2016, held that &#8220;if technical information jointly created by employees of a company is managed as trade secrets of that company, even if one is a joint creator, they cannot be considered to be in a position to freely dispose of such technical information, so if they use or disclose such technical information without authorization, it constitutes infringement of the company&#8217;s trade secrets.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Atlas Legal recently successfully provided legal strategy to coordinate the interests between two companies regarding the ownership and use of trade secrets in joint R&#038;D projects by creating contracts that adjust the interests between the two companies.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"section2-4\">Balance with Unfair Competition Prevention Act Purpose<\/h3>\n<p>The legislative purpose of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act is to maintain sound transaction order, strengthen the competitiveness of domestic industries, and contribute to national security and the development of the national economy.<\/p>\n<p>When determining the scope of self-use by joint owners of trade secrets, there is a view that free use by one joint owner of trade secrets should be permitted, similar to patent rights, considering not only the nature of trade secrets with non-disclosure and economic utility but also the legislative purpose of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act.<\/p>\n<p>Supreme Court Decision 2023Da224303 dated June 15, 2023 (high-speed train technical information case) specified that &#8220;joint owners of trade secrets may use trade secrets they jointly own without consent from other joint owners, unless there are different agreements between them, as long as they do not cause loss of trade secret nature by disclosing trade secrets.&#8221;<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"section3\">3. Conclusion<\/h2>\n<p>The application of breach of trust in trade secret infringement cases is controversial but actively practiced, with particular issues regarding non-return\/non-deletion acts after resignation and accomplice liability of competing companies.<\/p>\n<p>The joint ownership relationship of trade secrets applies civil law joint ownership by analogy, but the &#8216;Compromise Theory&#8217; that the scope of self-use by joint owners should be permitted within the range that does not cause loss of trade secret nature is presented as a leading interpretation.<\/p>\n<p>This can be evaluated as a balanced approach considering the legislative purpose of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act and the reality of technical information utilization, and is particularly suitable for modern industrial environments where subcontracting and third-party provision are common.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/knplawfirm1.tistory.com\/entry\/%EC%98%81%EC%97%85%EB%B9%84%EB%B0%80-%EC%9C%A0%EC%B6%9C%EC%82%AC%EA%B1%B4-%EB%AC%B4%EC%A3%84\"><span style=\"font-size: 18pt; color: #0000ff;\">Atlas Legal Practical Case 1<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/knplawfirm1.tistory.com\/entry\/%EC%98%81%EC%97%85%EB%B9%84%EB%B0%80-%EC%B9%A8%ED%95%B4-%EC%82%AC%EA%B1%B4-%EC%B2%98%EB%A6%AC-%EC%82%AC%EB%A1%80%EC%9D%B8%EC%B2%9C-%EC%98%81%EC%97%85%EB%B9%84%EB%B0%80-%EC%A0%84%EB%AC%B8-%EB%B3%80%ED%98%B8%EC%82%AC\"><span style=\"font-size: 18pt; color: #0000ff;\">Atlas Legal Practical Case 2<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/knplawfirm1.tistory.com\/entry\/%EC%98%81%EC%97%85%EB%B9%84%EB%B0%80-%EC%B7%A8%EB%93%9D-%EB%B0%8F-%EC%82%AC%EC%9A%A9%EC%82%AC%EA%B1%B4-%EB%AC%B4%EC%A3%84%EC%98%81%EC%97%85%EB%B9%84%EB%B0%80-%EC%A0%84%EB%AC%B8-%EB%B3%80%ED%98%B8%EC%82%AC-%EA%B9%80%ED%83%9C%EC%A7%84\"><span style=\"font-size: 18pt; color: #0000ff;\">Atlas Legal Practical Case 3<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/knplawfirm1.tistory.com\/entry\/%EB%B6%80%EC%A0%95%EA%B2%BD%EC%9F%81%EB%B0%A9%EC%A7%80%EB%B2%95-%EC%97%85%EB%AC%B4%EC%83%81-%EB%B0%B0%EC%9E%84-%ED%98%91%EC%9D%98%EC%97%86%EC%9D%8C-%EB%B2%95%EB%AC%B4%EB%B2%95%EC%9D%B8-%EC%BC%80%EC%9D%B4%EC%95%A4%ED%94%BC-%EC%8A%B9%EC%86%8C%EC%82%AC%EB%A1%80\"><span style=\"font-size: 18pt; color: #0000ff;\">Atlas Legal Practical Case 4<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/knplawfirm1.tistory.com\/entry\/%EC%A0%84%EC%A7%81%EA%B8%88%EC%A7%80-%EA%B0%80%EC%B2%98%EB%B6%84-%EC%8A%B9%EC%86%8C%EC%98%81%EC%97%85%EB%B9%84%EB%B0%80-%EA%B4%80%EB%A0%A8-%EB%B2%95%EB%AC%B4%EB%B2%95%EC%9D%B8-%EC%BC%80%EC%9D%B4%EC%95%A4%ED%94%BC-%EC%8A%B9%EC%86%8C%EC%82%AC%EB%A1%80-1\"><span style=\"font-size: 18pt; color: #0000ff;\">Atlas Legal Practical Case 5<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p>            &nbsp;<\/p>\n<div style=\"background-color: #f8f9fa; padding: 20px; border-radius: 8px; margin-top: 30px; border-left: 4px solid #722f37; font-family: Georgia, serif;\">\n<h3 style=\"margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 10px; font-size: 20px; color: #2c3e50; font-weight: bold;\">About the Author<\/h3>\n<div style=\"font-size: 18px; font-weight: bold; color: #333; margin-bottom: 5px;\">Taejin Kim | Managing Partner, Atlas Legal<\/div>\n<div style=\"font-size: 16px; color: #555; margin-bottom: 5px; line-height: 1.4;\">Attorney specializing in Corporate Advisory, Corporate Disputes, Corporate Criminal Law<\/div>\n<div style=\"font-size: 16px; color: #555; margin-bottom: 5px; line-height: 1.4;\">Former Prosecutor | 33rd Class of Judicial Research and Training Institute<\/div>\n<div style=\"font-size: 16px; color: #555; margin-bottom: 15px; line-height: 1.4;\">Korea University LL.B, LL.M. in Criminal Law, University of California, Davis LL.M.<\/div>\n<p>                <a href=\"https:\/\/        \n\n<div class=\"author-info\">Atlas Legal | Incheon Songdo, South Korea<\/div>\n<p>        atlaw.kr\/en&#8221; target=&#8221;_blank&#8221; rel=&#8221;noopener noreferrer&#8221; style=&#8221;display: inline-block; background-color: #722f37; color: white; padding: 12px 24px; text-decoration: none; border-radius: 6px; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; border: 2px solid #722f37; cursor: pointer; box-shadow: 0 2px 4px rgba(114, 47, 55, 0.3); margin-top: 5px;&#8221;>Visit Atlas Legal Website<\/a>\n            <\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Table of Contents 1. Relationship with Breach of Trust &#8211; Trade Secret Infringement and Breach of Trust Application &#8211; Fundamental Legal Principles of Breach of Trust &#8211; Trade Secret Leak and Breach of Trust Establishment &#8211; Accomplice Liability of Competing Companies &#8211; Trade Secret Protection Law Amendment and Breach of Trust &#8211; Systematic Issues in&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kadence_starter_templates_imported_post":false,"_kad_post_transparent":"default","_kad_post_title":"default","_kad_post_layout":"default","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"default","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"default","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[226,16,224],"tags":[89,90,91,88,74],"class_list":["post-73","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-trade-secrets","category-criminal","category-white-collar-crime","tag-breach-of-trust","tag-joint-ownership","tag-self-use-rights","tag-trade-secret","tag-unfair-competition-prevention-act"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.1 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>[Attorney Taejin Kim&#039;s Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership - Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Complete analysis of breach of trust application criteria in trade secret infringement cases and scope of joint owners&#039; self-use rights. Comprehensive examination of accomplice liability of competing companies, post-resignation non-return acts, compromise theory and other core legal principles\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ko_KR\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"[Attorney Taejin Kim&#039;s Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership - Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Complete analysis of breach of trust application criteria in trade secret infringement cases and scope of joint owners&#039; self-use rights. Comprehensive examination of accomplice liability of competing companies, post-resignation non-return acts, compromise theory and other core legal principles\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Atlas Legal Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-07-18T06:55:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-06-18T11:08:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\uae00\uc4f4\uc774\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"\uc608\uc0c1 \ub418\ub294 \ud310\ub3c5 \uc2dc\uac04\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11\ubd84\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55\"},\"headline\":\"[Attorney Taejin Kim&#8217;s Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership &#8211; Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-07-18T06:55:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-06-18T11:08:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":2016,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"breach of trust\",\"joint ownership\",\"self-use rights\",\"trade secret\",\"unfair competition prevention act\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Trade Secrets\",\"White Collar Crime\",\"White-Collar Crime\"],\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\\\/\",\"name\":\"[Attorney Taejin Kim's Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership - Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-07-18T06:55:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-06-18T11:08:04+00:00\",\"description\":\"Complete analysis of breach of trust application criteria in trade secret infringement cases and scope of joint owners' self-use rights. Comprehensive examination of accomplice liability of competing companies, post-resignation non-return acts, compromise theory and other core legal principles\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"\ud648\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"[Attorney Taejin Kim&#8217;s Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership &#8211; Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"Atlas Legal English Blog\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Atlas Legal English Blog\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png\",\"width\":540,\"height\":485,\"caption\":\"Atlas Legal English Blog\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55\",\"name\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/author\\\/prinz001\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"[Attorney Taejin Kim's Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership - Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners","description":"Complete analysis of breach of trust application criteria in trade secret infringement cases and scope of joint owners' self-use rights. Comprehensive examination of accomplice liability of competing companies, post-resignation non-return acts, compromise theory and other core legal principles","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/","og_locale":"ko_KR","og_type":"article","og_title":"[Attorney Taejin Kim's Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership - Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners","og_description":"Complete analysis of breach of trust application criteria in trade secret infringement cases and scope of joint owners' self-use rights. Comprehensive examination of accomplice liability of competing companies, post-resignation non-return acts, compromise theory and other core legal principles","og_url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/","og_site_name":"Atlas Legal Blog","article_published_time":"2025-07-18T06:55:59+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-06-18T11:08:04+00:00","author":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\uae00\uc4f4\uc774":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","\uc608\uc0c1 \ub418\ub294 \ud310\ub3c5 \uc2dc\uac04":"11\ubd84"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/"},"author":{"name":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/person\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55"},"headline":"[Attorney Taejin Kim&#8217;s Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership &#8211; Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners","datePublished":"2025-07-18T06:55:59+00:00","dateModified":"2026-06-18T11:08:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/"},"wordCount":2016,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#organization"},"keywords":["breach of trust","joint ownership","self-use rights","trade secret","unfair competition prevention act"],"articleSection":["Trade Secrets","White Collar Crime","White-Collar Crime"],"inLanguage":"ko-KR"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/","name":"[Attorney Taejin Kim's Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership - Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-07-18T06:55:59+00:00","dateModified":"2026-06-18T11:08:04+00:00","description":"Complete analysis of breach of trust application criteria in trade secret infringement cases and scope of joint owners' self-use rights. Comprehensive examination of accomplice liability of competing companies, post-resignation non-return acts, compromise theory and other core legal principles","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ko-KR","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/attorney-taejin-kims-trade-secret-series-5-complete-analysis-of-breach-of-trust-and-joint-ownership-essential-legal-issues-and-response-strategies-for-practitioners\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"\ud648","item":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"[Attorney Taejin Kim&#8217;s Trade Secret Series 5] Complete Analysis of Breach of Trust and Joint Ownership &#8211; Essential Legal Issues and Response Strategies for Practitioners"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/","name":"Atlas Legal English Blog","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ko-KR"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#organization","name":"Atlas Legal English Blog","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ko-KR","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2025\/09\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2025\/09\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png","width":540,"height":485,"caption":"Atlas Legal English Blog"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/person\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55","name":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ko-KR","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/atlaw.kr"],"url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/author\/prinz001\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=73"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1359,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73\/revisions\/1359"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}