Background
When a star instructor leaves an academy, it is not always a simple change of workplace: sometimes they effectively take the student relationships and materials built up over the years with them to a competing academy. For the academy, its core asset — its student base — is shaken to its foundations. Changchun has acted for academies harmed in this way.
The Issue — The Instructor's Own Ability, or the Academy's Business Foundation?
In matters of this kind, the question is not only breach of a non-competition covenant but also whether the instructor made improper use of business information and student relationships the academy built up with its own time and money. The key was to distinguish the instructor's legitimate professional activity from the academy's protectable business interests and so determine the scope of liability.
How Changchun Helped
Changchun (attorneys Jaesun Yoon and Donghwan Shin), which has acted for many academies, established liability in damages by setting out point by point, with supporting evidence, ① the instructor's breach of the non-competition covenant; ② circumstances showing that this went beyond a simple change of employer to improper use of the business foundation the academy had accumulated, including student relationships and materials; and ③ the real loss the academy suffered as a result.
The case draws a clear line between an instructor's legitimate move and the business interests an academy is entitled to protect. Changchun works to protect the business foundation academies build over many years against improper departures by instructors. (Outcomes depend on the facts of each case and may differ.)