論離職後競業禁止條款中雇主應受保護之正當營業利益－以客戶關係為中心

勞動基準法於104年12月16日新增第9條之1關於離職後競業禁止條款之規範，但離職後競業禁止條款中雇主應受保護之正當營業利益是否僅限於營業秘密，不論是在勞動基準法第9條之1增訂前後都存在爭議，而有釐清之必要，本文以無法完全被營業秘密概念涵蓋之「客戶關係」為例，探討離職後競業禁止條款保護的正當營業利益是否僅限於營業秘密，以期對於勞動基準法第9條之1之適用提出建議。由於我國目前產業結構以第三級產業為主，客戶關係屬於雇主重要的營業利益，更突顯有分析客戶關係是否應受到離職後競業禁止條款保護之實益。本文認為，離職後競業禁止條款的目的在於避免雇主受到離職勞工的不正競爭，而侵害營業秘密僅屬於不正競爭態樣之一，因此，離職後競業禁止條款中雇主應受保護正當營業利益不限於營業秘密，應該包含客戶關係。但因為國內文獻相關論述尚屬缺乏，本文將以美國離職後競業禁止法制作為比較法的研究對象，並且介紹伊利諾州法院判斷客戶關係是否屬於雇主正當營業利益的要件與案例，以深化本文討論。結論上，本文認為只要雇主能夠證明客戶關係確實帶給雇主競爭優勢，且勞工的職位對於客戶有足夠影響力，讓客戶在勞工離職後流失，客戶關係即有受到離職後競業禁止條款保護的必要，離職後競業禁止條款應得通過勞動基準法的9條之1第1項第1、2款的檢驗。

關鍵字

營業秘密；客戶關係；勞動基準法第9條之1 ；離職後競業禁止條款；禁止招攬客戶條款；雇主正當營業利益

並列摘要

The non-compete clause will harm the employee’s right to work, so it’s necessary to set up some conditions to exam the validity of the clause. Before 2015, there is no statute to regulate the non-compete clause, so the court has developed different criteria to exam the validity of non-compete clause. No matter which criteria the court choose, The non-compete clause will be in invalid, if the employer has no legitimate business interests to be protected. Nevertheless, there is no clear definition of the legitimate business interest in the academic articles and the judgement. It’s disputed whether trade secret is the only legitimate business interest for the employer. Though in 2015, The Labor Standards Act Article 9-1 was made to clarify the criteria to exam the validity of non-compete clause, the dispute is still exist. Therefore, this Article intend to study whether the employer’s business interest besides trade secret can be protected by the non-compete clause and will focus on the customer relationship. Through demonstrate the employer’s customer relationship should be protected by the non-compete clause, this article will explain that it’s unnecessary to insist trade secret is the only legitimate business interest.