People’s Procuratorate of Xi'an Municipality v. Pei Guoliang
Shaanxi Province Higher People’s Court
Shaanxi Province Higher People’s Court (2006)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
Pei Guoliang (defendant) was employed as an engineer at the Xi’an Heavy Machinery Research Institute (XHMRI), where he worked on the development of a steel-casting machine. XHMRI took steps to ensure the secrecy of technical information, including confidentiality clauses in the contracts signed by employees like Pei. However, Pei copied the electronic text of the drawings for the steel-casting machine, stored them on his computer, and used them in the design of machinery for a subsequent employer, CCTEC Engineering Joint Stock Company Limited (CCTEC) (defendant). XHMRI brought an incidental civil suit against Pei and CCTEC, and the People’s Procuratorate of Xi’an Municipality brought an action against Pei and CCTEC in the Xi’an Municipality, Shaanxi Province Intermediate People’s Court. Although Pei denied wrongdoing, the evidence that he had stolen technical drawings from XHMRI was corroborated. The court sentenced Pei to three years’ imprisonment and ordered Pei and CCTEC to jointly compensate XHMRI for damages representing XHMRI’s economic losses. Pei and CCTEC appealed to the Shaanxi Province Higher People’s Court, with Pei continuing to deny wrongdoing and CCTEC asserting that it did not steal the drawings and should not be a defendant in the case.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
