• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.29 no.7
• /
• pp.169-179
• /
• 2024

Currently, information technologies such as blockchain and metaverse are being innovatively developed in Korea and around the world. The government has defined the innovation of these cyber-related technologies as the fourth industrial revolution and presented the Digital New Deal as an important policy of the Korean version of the New Deal, and is implementing various policies and systems related to it. This situation is expected to affect the development of the real estate registration system in Korea. Moreover, as the Supreme Court is currently promoting the transition to a future registration system, it is necessary to examine whether blockchain technology, which allows parties to exchange value without a third party guaranteeing the transaction, can be used in the real estate registration system. In order to secure the credibility of the real estate registration as electronic information under the registration system that introduces electronic registration and blockchain system, the transparency of transaction identification and real estate registration details should also be recorded using the blockchain system as a way to prevent such crimes and legal disputes. As a solution, it is worth considering how to improve the reliability of transaction identification, recognize the actual examination rights of the registrar in the foundation system of the real estate register, and increase public trust by going through the notarization stage when recording rights such as real rights, and consider how to introduce a blockchain system at this stage to ensure integrity and reliability. In the stage before the current real estate registration and study system is converted to a blockchain system, the clarity, transparency, and consistency of the real estate registration entries with the actual real estate must be established so that the real estate study can finally be recognized as authoritative, thereby ensuring the trust of the transaction parties to the real estate study system that has adopted the blockchain system in the future, and bringing us closer to the goal of real estate transactions in the form of smart contracts between the parties who have trusted it based on transparency and integrity of real estate study in the real estate transaction market.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.44
• /
• pp.571-610
• /
• 2013

The current patent system is more often used for defensive purposes to exclude others' use or as a means to hold unfair strong positions in negotiations rather than for the original purpose as the dissemination and active use of useful technology. An injunction together with a damage is an important remedy for patent infringements. However, unlike a claim for damages, injunctions do not require the subjective requirement of intent and negligence or the occurrence of loss. If the validity of the patent and the fact of infringement are confirmed, automatically injunctions are issued without consideration of other circumstances. So a patent holder would exclude others' use and have a powerful position in negotiations because of injunctions for patent infringements. Therefore, those injunctions for patent infringements should be flexibly restricted according to cases under the premise to ensure fair compensation for the patent owner, rather than absolutely admitting injunctions for patent infringements like now. If then, it would serve the use of a useful technology and industrial development as the purpose of the patent system. First of all, judgments for preliminary injunctions should be strict and by deliberate decision on the merits permanent injunctions should be determined. In addition, it is needed that court's discretion possible to considerate 'the need for an injunction'. When the courts judge 'the need for an injunction', 'whether a patent holder has implemented a patent invention, the possibility of monetary compensation and the ability of the infringer for damages, a patent holder's intent to license and whether an injunction has been used as a weapon of negotiation, the proportion of patent technology in the entire products, the characteristics of patent technology and the possibility of patent invalidity, the competitive relationship for market share, the public interests and gains and losses between the parties and so on' should be considered. After these judgements, if 'the need for an injunction' is not approved, a patent owner would be protected by post-monetary compensation. However, because damages are related to illegal conducts in the past, in the case that an injunction is restrained, measures to ensure the legal implementation in the future are needed. It is primarily desirable that reasonable royalty is estimated throughout private negotiations between parties, but if agreement between the parties does not occur, patent owner should be able to claim the royalty for future.