搜索
PrefaceThepurposeofthisguideistoprovideforeignpractitionerswithanoverviewofpatentinfringementlawsuitsinSouthKorea,onwhattheKoreancourtsarerelatedtopatentdisputes,whatprocedureshappenincourts,whattheKoreanPatentOfficeandthePatentCourtrole,whatissueshasbeenraisedintherecentyears,andsoon.Further,itincludesthetimeframesandcostsinvolvedinpatentlawsuits.OverviewoftheKoreanLegalSystemTherearethreetiersofcourtsinKorea:theDistrictCourts,theHighCourtsandtheSupremeCourt.TheSupremeCourtlocatedinSeoulconsistsofaChiefJusticeand13Justices.Koreafollowscivillawtradition.Accordingly,adecisionoftheSupremeCourtdoesnothavebindingauthoritybutsincethelowercourtsfollowtheSupremeCourt’sinterpretationofalaw,theeffectofaSupremeCourtdecisionamountstoabindingforceonthelowercourts.NeitherthejurysystemnorpunitivedamagecompensationexistsinKorea.TheDistrictCourtsanditsBranchCourtshearthefirstinstanceofcases.Forexample,apatenteemustbringapatentinfringementlawsuitbeforeaDistrictCourtoraBranchCourtofaDistrictCourtthathasjurisdictionoverthecase.TheHighCourtsareappellatecourts.Apanelofthreejudgeshearspatentinfringementcases.293ThePatentCourtThePatentCourtisthecourtthatspecializesinIP,andislocatedinTaejonwhichisacity200kmsouthofSeoul.ThePatentCourtisahighcourthavingexclusivejurisdictionoverallappealsoftheIPTandKIPO.Thereare9technicalexpertsassistingjudgesofthePatentCourtaslawclerks.Theyhavedifferenttechnicalexpertise,andthusensureabroadcoverageoftechnology.Further,theyareallex-examinershavingatleast5yearsexperienceexaminingpatentapplicationsatKIPO.KIPOandtheIPTTheKoreanIntellectualPropertyOffice(KIPO)islocatedinTaejeon.WithinKIPO,theIntellectualPropertyTribunal(IPT),asBoardofAppeal,handlesappeals,invalidityproceedings,andproceedingstodeterminethescopeofpatentrights.InvalidationPetitionsmustbebroughttotheIPT,whichhasexclusivesubjectmatterjurisdictionforthevalidityofpatents,utilitymodels,industrialdesignsandtrademarks.KIPOhasfourexaminationbureaus:Trademarks&Design,Machinery&Metals,Chemistry&BiotechnologyandElectric&Electronic.A.ExParteProceedingsintheIPT(i)AppealingaFinalRejectionWhenanapplicantappealsanexaminer’sfinalrejectionbeforetheIPTwithin30daysfromthereceiptofthefinalrejection,theapplicantmayamendthespecificationwithin30daysofthefilingdateofanappeal.Whenitisthecase,theapplicationwillbereturnedtotheexaminerforfurtherconsiderationbasedontheamendment.ThisplaysasacontinuedexaminationprocessaslikeRCEintheU.S.Onlyaftertheexaminermaintainshisrejectionwillapanelof3boardexaminersreviewthecase.(ii)CorrectionoftheGrantedPatentSpecificationApatenteemaycorrectagrantedspecificationordrawing.TheIPTdecideswhetherthepetitiontocorrectisallowed.Apatenteemayavoidaninvalidationofapatentby4changingthegrantedspecification.However,Koreanpatentlawstrictlylimitsthescopeofcorrectiontotherangesofnarrowingthescopeofaclaim,correctingclericalerrors,andclarifyingambiguousdescriptionsinordertoavoidunexpectedcircumstancestoanythirdparty.B.InterParteProceedingsintheIPT(i)InvalidationProceedingAnypartyinterestedinthevalidityofagrantedpatentmayinitiateaninvalidationproceedingbyfilinganinvalidationpetitiontotheIPT.TheinvalidationpetitionmaybefiledevenaftertheexpirationofthesubjectIPrights.Apanelof3boardexaminersreviewsthecaseandmayalloworalargumentshearingforbothparties.(ii)ProceedingtoDeterminetheScopeofaPatentRightApatenteeoraninterestedpartymayinitiateaproceedingtodeterminethescopeofapatentright.TheIPThasexclusivejurisdictionandisindependentfromcourtproceduresininterpretingthescopeofthepatentedclaims.AlthoughacourtdoesnotbindtheIPT’sdecisionofinterpretingclaimsinthisproceeding,itplaystheimportantroleasstrongpersuasiveevidencetotheCourtininterpretingthesubjectpatentclaims.5TwoRoutesofProceedings6BasicsofKoreanPatentLawTheKoreanpatentsystemisbasedonthefirst-to-filerule,inwhichthefirstfileapplicantisentitledtoapatentrightregardlessofthepriorityoftheinvention.Allunexaminedapplicationsareautomaticallypublishedafter18monthsfromthefilingdateinKoreaortheearliestprioritydateinaforeigncountry.Inaddition,afterapatentapplicationisgrantedandthepatentisregistered,thepatentedspecificationispublishedagain.Onceanunexaminedpatentspecificationhasbeenpublished,anypersonmaysubmitanyrelevantinformationrelatingtothepatentabilityoftheapplicationtoKIPOinordertopreventgrantingapatentthereof.Incontrast,iftheapplicantwarnsinwritinganallegedinfringeraboutpossibleinfringementoftheclaimedinventionafterhisapplicationhasbeenpublished,hemayrecoverreasonablecompensationofdamagefromtheinfringer.Areasonableamountofcompensationwillbedecidedfromthedateofreceiptofthewarningletter.Thecompensation,however,canbecollectedonlyaftertheregistrationofthepatentapplicationApatentapplicationwillbeexaminedonlywhenanapplicantrequeststheexaminationoftheapplicationwithin5yearsofthefilingdateinKoreaortheinternationalfilingdateforaPCTrouteapplication.Ifnorequestforexaminationismadebythedeadline,theapplicationisdeemedtohavebeenwithdrawn.Aregisteredpatentmaybeinvalidatedonlythroughaninvalidationtrial.BecausetheIPThasexclusivejurisd