In relation to the’battery technology dispute’ between LG Energy Solution and SK Innovation, the US International Trade Commission (ITC) commented that “If SK independently developed the product without infringing LG’s trade secrets, it would have taken 10 years more” 5 Sun said.
ITC presented the grounds for the ’10-year US import ban’ that it took last month against SK Innovation in its final opinion that was released on the same day. The most problematic part of ITC was the destruction of evidence by SK. “It was done company-wide by the heads of the organization under the direction of the upper class.” The ITC also pointed out that “the act of destroying data was rampant and was tolerated at the organizational level,” even when it made an early loss decision to SK in February of last year. ITC emphasized that “SK Innovation was an excuse that it was a regular practice, and it was blatantly malicious and attempted to delete documents and conceal them.”
Based on this, ITC explained that it determined that 22 trade secrets of 11 items claimed by LG Energy Solutions were subject to legal relief orders. The US import ban also agreed to LG’s claim and set it to 10 years. ITC added, “Without the infringed trade secrets, SK would not have been able to develop the information within 10 years,” adding that “the 10-year period is not excessive.” In addition, he pointed out that SK Innovation made the lowest bid using LG’s trade secrets during the bidding process for the volume ordered by Volkswagen in 2018, which led to actual orders.
In this regard, LG said, “Over the past 10 years, it has spent 5.3 trillion won in battery R&D and 15 trillion won in facility investment. “I took it,” he pointed out.
On the other hand, the SK side issued a statement to the effect that it would not admit the infringement of trade secrets, and proceeded to counter it head-on. “The ITC only made a problem with procedures such as document deletion without substantive verification of trade secret infringement.” An SK official said, “Even though ITC decided that the trade secret was infringed, it was not possible to determine exactly what the trade secret was infringed, and how it was violated.” For 22 items that were recognized for infringement of trade secrets, he added, “ITC admitted that the scope was ambiguous by requiring separate approval to determine whether individual imported goods are actually subject to import bans.
With regard to the destruction of evidence, SK Innovation argued that “ITC accepted that LG Energy Solutions asserted that the deletion of documents caused by misjudgment only in some teams as if there was a company-wide and malicious destruction of evidence.”
SK Innovation said, “ITC’s ambiguous decision will bring serious economic and environmental harm to the US electric vehicle battery industry.” US President Joe Biden can exercise his veto until the 11th of next month.
Reporter Ahn Jae-kwang [email protected]
Ⓒ Hankyung.com prohibits unauthorized reproduction and redistribution