As reports emerge about individuals who transferred key domestic technologies to China, reactions have surfaced questioning whether they were ultimately exploited. Despite promises of high salaries, housing and education support, and guarantees of equity and management rights, many have faced termination or demands for further technology leaks shortly after their arrival.
On the 27th, various online communities shared a post titled 'Words of Technology Leak Offenders.'
The post details the conditions and realities faced by those involved in technology leaks in the display, shipbuilding, and semiconductor sectors. According to the post, the offers from Chinese companies were quite enticing, including high salaries, international school tuition for children, housing support, provision of apartments and cars, and guarantees of equity and management rights. Although they were promised stable long-term living conditions, many encountered a starkly different reality after moving to China.
In case A, related to a display technology leak, the Chinese side promised a three-year employment guarantee in exchange for the technology, with the possibility of an additional two years. They also offered support for children's international schooling and housing. However, contrary to these promises, the individual was terminated after just one and a half years, leaving with only a few months' worth of wages and no long-term employment security.
Case B involves a shipbuilding technology leak. The Chinese side proposed a '3+2' employment model with a salary double that of the previous job, along with promises of an apartment and a car. However, after relocating, the individual faced pressure to secure additional Korean technology and was effectively monitored during work processes with the aid of an interpreter. Ultimately, they were dismissed from the Chinese company after about a year.
In case C, related to core semiconductor technology, the Chinese side offered equity and management rights if certain goals were met, along with support for children's education and high-end housing. However, after moving, the individual was pressured for further technology leaks beyond the initial agreement. Following the initiation of a technology leak investigation in Korea, the individual was terminated, and their family struggled to adapt to life in China, eventually relocating to a third country.
A common theme in these cases is the strategy of luring key personnel with attractive offers, only to swiftly terminate employment once the goal of securing technology is achieved or circumstances change.
Critics point out that for those involved in technology leaks, losing the professional credibility and social trust built in Korea, along with the uncertainty of long-term employment and living conditions in China, poses significant risks.
As these cases come to light, online reactions have highlighted the disparity between the benefits gained from technology leaks and the harsh realities that follow. Users have commented, 'In the end, were they just used and discarded?' and 'Even if they offer a lot of money, selling national technology is risky.' Others noted, 'They believed the promises of good treatment in China, but once they were no longer needed, they were discarded immediately.'
Some users remarked, 'They thought they could live comfortably in China after leaking technology, but the reality is different,' and 'They only take you when they need Korean technology, and once they secure it, they let you go.' There were also comments about the additional demands for technology leaks, stating, 'Once you start leaking technology, they keep asking for more,' and 'It seems the technology itself was the main goal, rather than the initial promises.'
Conversely, some users emphasized the responsibility of those involved, stating, 'They should never have leaked technology in the first place,' and 'They are paying the price for handing over core national technology for money.' They argued that if they had not made illegal choices from the beginning, these situations would not have arisen.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.