:::Law Office of Yoolhyun:::
 

글제목 Supreme Court en banc Decision 2009Hu2234 Decided January 19, 2012[Invalidation of Registration (Patent)]*
작성일 2013-10-10 (목) 14:13
출처 대법원
ㆍ조회: 211  
[Main Issues and Holdings]

[1] Time point for the determination of whether a trial request is illegitimate pursuant to the principle against the double jeopardy of Article 163 of the former Patent Act (=the time of requesting a trial)

[2] In case where Gap corporation requested a registration invalidation trial against Eul, etc. about the patent invention of "Native language service system of Internet address" based on lack of progressiveness and the issue is whether it violates the principle of the double jeopardy of Article 163 of the former Patent Act in relation to the fact that Byung corporation requested a registration invalidation trial of patent invention against Eul, etc., which was finalized with dismissal decision, the case holding that Gap's trial request does not violate the above principle



[Summary of Decision]

[1] The Supreme Court used to interpret that the principle against the double jeopardy (hereinafter, "the principle") under Article 163 of the former Patent Act (amended by Act No. 6411 of Feb. 3, 2001, the same applies hereinafter) is applied with the criterion of not the trial request time, but the decision time. Under such Supreme Court precedents, where multiple trial requests were filed concerning the identical patent on the basis of the same fact and evidence, if other trial decision is finalized and registered while a revocation lawsuit against a certain trial decision("the first decision") is under progress, and the court revokes the first decision since such request has merit, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal has no choice but to dismiss the trial request pursuant to the principle when the trial request is to be decided again under Article 189 (1) and (2) of the Patent Act. However, it can infringe excessively the citizen's constitutionally guaranteed right to request trial since the procedure under progress for a trial requester's own interest becomes retrospectively illegitimate by fortuitous circumstance like the registration of finalized related decision. Such result is irrational since the court judgment revoking Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal's decision becomes meaningless. Further, Article 163 of the former Patent Act defines a personal scope for no double jeopardy as "anybody." Since no one including the finalized and registered decision party or successor can request the same trial based on the same fact and evidence, to expand its application scope without reason restricts the citizen's exercise of the right to request trial. Article 163 of the former Patent Act provides "can not request the trial," and it is only interpreted that once trial decision is finalized and registered, a new trial request is not allowed based on the same fact and evidence of preceding trial request. Nonetheless, if the trial request becomes retrospectively illegitimate due to the principle where other trial's decision was not yet finalized and registered at the trial request, but finalized and registered at the time of decision, such interpretation is not rational. Thus, the issue of whether the trial request is illegitimate under the principle should be decided as of the trial request time. The principle does not render the trial request illegitimate where the other trial decision with the same fact and evidence is finalized and registered after the trial request.

[2] In case where Gap corporation requested a registration invalidation trial against Eul, etc. about the patent invention of "Native language service system of Internet address" based on lack of progressiveness (hereinafter "trial request of this case," and the issue is whether it violates the principle of the double jeopardy (hereinafter, "the principle") of Article 163 of the former Patent Act (amended by Act No. 6411 of Feb. 3, 2001, hereinafter the same applies) in relation to the fact that Byung corporation requested a registration invalidation trial of patent invention against Eul, etc. which was finalized with dismissal decision (hereinafter "finalized decision outside of this case"), the case held that the trial request of this case does not violate the principle of Article 163 of the former Patent Act on the ground that the finalized decision outside of this case was not finalized and registered at the time of trial request of this case, although Byung corporation's trial request of this case and finalized decision outside of this case constitutes a trial request with "the same fact and evidence" of Article 163 of the former Patent Act.
No. 분류 제목 출처 작성일 조회
54 논문 및 기고문 선박의 押留, 假押留 금지규정에 대한 타당성 검토 율현 2013-10-10 852
53 논문 및 기고문 해상운송기업의 조세회피와 그 대응방안 한국 해법학회 판례 연구 2013-10-10 555
52 논문 및 기고문 해난구조료 판례월보 325호 2013-10-10 257
51 논문 및 기고문 근로자성이 인정되던 채권추심원이 중도에 근로자성인정 징표가 .. 율현 2013-10-10 228
50 논문 및 기고문 민사집행에 있어서 사법보좌관의 결정에 대한 이의 신청에 대한 .. 법률신문 2013-10-10 217
49 법률자료 근재보험청구 승소사안(피고대리) 승소사례 2018-10-01 214
48 논문 및 기고문 상법 제806조의 해석과 상법 제766조제 1항과의 관계 법률신문 2013-10-10 211
47 법률자료 Supreme Court en banc Decision 2009Hu2234 Decided January 19.. 대법원 2013-10-10 211
46 법률자료 제조물책임보험 승소사안(원고대리) 승소사례 2018-10-01 210
45 논문 및 기고문 정권의 불법사찰, 정치권 사죄해야 법률신문 2013-10-10 200
44 논문 및 기고문 공직선거법의 미비점, 보완해야 법률신문 2013-10-10 191
43 법률자료 화재보험금청구 승소사안 승소사례 2018-10-01 178
42 법률자료 건설공사보험 구상금 승소사안 승소사례 2018-10-01 170
41 논문 및 기고문 변호사실무수습제도의 중요성 법률신문 2013-10-10 156
40 논문 및 기고문 근저당권설정비용의 부담 주체의관한소고 법률신문 2013-10-10 155
39 논문 및 기고문 공직사회의 부정부패, 고리를 끊으려면 법률신문 2013-10-10 140
38 논문 및 기고문 정치적 목적의 근거 없는 인신공격 사라져야 법률신문 2013-10-10 139
37 논문 및 기고문 경찰의 총기사용은 자제돼야 한다 법률신문 2013-10-10 133
36 논문 및 기고문 법조계를 향한 여론의 평가 법률신문 2013-10-10 133
35 논문 및 기고문 검찰 민간인 불법사찰 재수사, 명예회복 계기로 삼아라 법률신문 2013-10-10 132
34 논문 및 기고문 사법부의 권위, 언론과 국가기관이 먼저 존중해야 법률신문 2013-10-10 132
33 논문 및 기고문 변호사 중개제도의 활성화를 위하여 법률신문 2013-10-10 132
32 논문 및 기고문 곽 서울 교육감, 근신하는 모습을 보여주길 법률신문 2013-10-10 131
31 논문 및 기고문 전관예우 희생자, 더 이상 없어야 법률신문 2013-10-10 129
30 논문 및 기고문 헌재 '특허 침해 소송 대리권' 합헌 결정 이후 법률신문 2013-10-10 126
29 논문 및 기고문 법률시장 개방에 따른 법무부와 대한변협의 역할 법률신문 2013-10-10 123
28 논문 및 기고문 신임 대법관, 취임 초심 잃지 말아야 법률신문 2013-10-10 122
27 논문 및 기고문 문화재보호법상 공용제한과 손실보상규정 율현 2013-10-10 122
26 논문 및 기고문 법제처의 "국민법제관 제도"에 부쳐 법률신문 2013-10-10 120
25 논문 및 기고문 무리한 세외수입의 확대를 경계한다. 법률신문사설 12.10.25. 2013-10-10 118
12