KPPU Imposed IDR 3 billion Penalty to PT Maruka Indonesia for Conspired to Obtain Company Secret

The Indonesia Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) imposed a fine of IDR 3 billion on PT Maruka Indonesia for being proven to have conspired to obtain company secrets in Case Number 08/KPPU-L/2024 concerning Alleged Violation of Article 23 of Law Number 5 of 1999 related to Conspiracy to Obtain Company Secrets of PT Chiyoda Kogyo Indonesia. The fine was read out by the Commission Panel led by KPPU Member Eugenia Mardanugraha as Chairperson of the Commission Panel, as well as KPPU Members Mohammad Reza and Hilman Pujana as Members of the Commission Panel, at the Decision Reading Panel Session held yesterday afternoon, 25 February 2025 at the KPPU Courtroom in Jakarta.

Previously, KPPU Investigators in following up on public reports had alleged a conspiracy committed by several Reported Parties in obtaining company secrets belonging to PT Chiyoda Kogyo Indonesia (PT CKI). The three Reporting Parties consist of PT Maruka Indonesia (Reported Party I), Mr Hiroo Yoshida (Reported Party II), and PT Unique Solution Indonesia (Reported Party III). Reported Party I and III are Japanese foreign investment companies (PMA), while Reported Party II is an individual Japanese citizen. The complainant in this case, PT CKI, which is also a Japanese PMA, is a company engaged in the trading of industrial and manufacturing machinery. In its report. PT CKI also requested that the Complainants pay both material and immaterial damages to the Complainant. (Notes: Pursuant to Article 38 paragraph 2 of Law No. 5/1999, the identity of the Complainant is not required to be kept confidential for Reports that include claims for compensation).

In the Alleged Violation Report, the KPPU Investigator explained that the Reported Party II was a former employee of the Complainant, who after quitting the company, worked and served as President Director at the Reported Party III. The Reporting Party, which is a trading company, previously cooperated with the Complainant to make machines ordered by the client of the Reporting Party. At that time, the Reported Party II was the Marketing Director of the Complainant. On 23 June 2020, it is known that the Reported Party I together with the Reported Party II established the Reported Party III company, and appointed the Reported Party II as President Director. With the alleged conspiracy between the Reported Party I and the Reported Party II who formed the Reported Party III, the special use machine order work previously carried out by the Complainant was shifted to be carried out by the Reported Party III. The work of the industrial machine order was carried out by the Reporting Party's former employee who was allegedly invited by the Reporting Party II to move to the Reporting Party III.

As a result of the alleged conspiracy, the Reporting Party's income was affected. In its report, the Complainant stated that there was a significant decrease in revenue in the Special Purpose Machine Division, from IDR 112 billion in December 2019 to IDR 40 billion in December 2020. As a result of the alleged conspiracy, the Complainant is alleged to have suffered a loss of IDR 63 billion, and has therefore applied for compensation. In the Alleged Violation Report, the KPPU Investigator also presented various findings that led to the alleged violation of Article 23 of Law Number 5 Year 1999 committed by the Reported Parties.

In the Continuing Examination, the Commission Panel has heard testimony from various Witnesses and Experts presented by the Investigator and the Reported Parties. The Reported Parties themselves were considered by the Commission Panel to be disobedient to the applicable law in Indonesia because they did not want to attend the trial at the KPPU. Finally, through the trial, the Commission Panel found the fact that there had been a conspiracy by the Complainants to obtain the business activities of their competitors which were classified as the Complainant's company secrets in the form of projects, customers and employees who moved to the Reported Party I and the Reported Party III, and the use of company secrets in the form of video recordings belonging to the Complainant which were used by the Reported Party II to design similar project drawings. The Commission Panel also considered that unfair competition in this case occurred because the Reported Parties took the Complainant's customers, and did not attempt to expand the market by finding new customers.

Based on the facts and evidence in the trial, the Commission Panel decided that PT Maruka Indonesia (Reported Party I) and Mr Hiroo Yoshida (Reported Party II) were proven to have legally and convincingly violated Article 23 of Law No. 5 Year 1999. The other reported party, PT Unique Solution Indonesia, was not proven to violate the article because it was a company formed by Reported Party I and Reported Party II to accommodate the results of their conspiracy. For the violation, KPPU imposed a fine of IDR 3 billion on PT Maruka Indonesia, but did not impose a fine on Mr Hiroo Yoshida (Reported Party II) because he is not a business actor. The Commission Panel also decided to reject the request for compensation for both material and immaterial losses submitted by the Complainant, because the amount of loss could not be proven by the Complainant in the trial. //