• Asia-pacific Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and Sociology
• /
• v.8 no.4
• /
• pp.35-44
• /
• 2018

Unlike other lawsuits, patent infringement litigation is a very difficult case to grasp without expert knowledge of the patented technology. The Patent Agent Act seems to recognize the legal representation of patent agent in Article 8, but the Constitutional Court and the Court have refused to recognize patent agent's legal representation right in the patent infringement suit. In this regard, constant controversy is taking place among patent agents and lawyers. This study examines the measures to enhance the effectiveness and professionalism of patent litigation in patent infringement litigation. This study analyzes the role of patent attorneys in patent infringement lawsuits in major countries and derive rational alternatives. As a result, it is inappropriate to restrict the attorneys' automatic acquisition of patent attorneys' qualifications or revise the patent attorneys' law in relation to the patent attorney's right of proxy. In the case of litigation parties, it is a desirable alternative to introduce a revised patent attorney system for the fundamental problem solving and to allow the litigants to reasonably choose the litigation agent.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.121-147
• /
• 2016

Factual issues in most patent litigation are related to very complicated techniques. Thus, the courts has emphasised that the technology in dispute has to be read and understood through the eyes of a person to whom it is directed. Therefore, among the various processes in federal litigation, most litigation in the field of patent infringement relies on at least some expert evidence. This paper focuses on issues regarding patent dispute evidence, and explore whether there are unresolved issues in evidential rules and procedures of patent proceedings. Further, this paper seeks to demonstrate that both the parties and the courts in patent disputes generally benefit from the current evidence system. However, in a number of Australian cases, the scope of expert evidence in patent cases has been strictly limited. Australian Government identified uncertain issues associated with the present patent enforcement system, due to factors such as a low level of knowledge about what patent rights entail, the high degree of uncertainty of outcome in legal proceedings, etc. Arbitration shall be reviewed and suggested as an alternative to tackling the ongoing problems in the trial system.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2024

"Arbitration" is a procedure to settle a dispute over property rights or disputes based on non-property rights that the parties can resolve through a reconciliation, not by a judgment of a court, but by an award of an arbitrator, and is a kind of Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR). Arbitration is the most representative and efficient ADR system in many fields, so by activating it, disputes can be resolved smoothly and ultimately, and social costs caused by a heavy increase in lawsuit can be reduced. Arbitration costs are often evaluated as 'cheap', but in reality, they can be similar to or exceed litigation costs. Nevertheless, unlike the Civil Procedure Act, which stipulates the litigation aid system for those who are hard to pay litigation costs, the Arbitration Act or the Arbitration Industry Promotion Act does not have the arbitration aid system for those who are hard to pay arbitration costs. However, considering ① the utility of arbitration compared to other dispute resolution procedures, such as litigation, ② the possibility of resolving trial delays through vitalizing arbitration, ③ the need to guarantee access to arbitration, ④ the feasibility of revitalizing arbitration by the arbitration aid system, it is necessary to introduce the Arbitration Aid System. To explain the details of the Arbitration Aid System, a person who intends to apply for arbitration or a party who continues arbitration could be the applicant. Regarding the judge, this paper suggests the establishment of a council for arbitration aid to prevent the possibility of prejudgment by the arbitral tribunal. Also, if the council accepts the application for arbitration aid, it would be appropriate for the arbitral tribunal to determine the allocation of arbitration costs considering the decision of the council and to include it into arbitral awards.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.48 no.4
• /
• pp.8-18
• /
• 2020

This study selected landscaping-related precedents among Supreme Court decisions to which the Basic Construction Industry Act and Civil Litigation Act were applied, and divided them by year, by sector type, and by litigation type according to the cause of the litigation, and examined time-series trends and the main characteristics of landscaping-related litigation. As a result of the analysis by year, it became apparent that litigation cases began to appear in earnest in 1977, similar to when landscape licenses were first issued. The types according to the cause of the litigation were analyzed by dividing them into 'planning', 'construction', and 'management'. Among them, 'planning' was the most frequently identified (409 cases). Various precedents were searched according to 'construction', and some of them were found to be due to unclear legal standards related to landscaping. In 'management', cases such as safety accidents and crimes were considered. The users, legal definitions, and purposes of the space served as the basis for judgments. As a result of analysis by case type, there were many administrative landscaping-related cases, and the proportion of criminal cases in the management type was the highest. The results of this study looked at precedents across the entire landscape industry, and it was significant that it provides basic data that could be used by the general public as that they were categorized by field. In the future, amendments to the law and various studies should be conducted to reduce and resolve disputes, and it is necessary to expand the publicity of precedents for this purpose.

• Knowledge Management Research
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2020

Although patents have mainly been considered as the results of the invention process, of late their value as strategic assets have increasingly been emphasized. Consequently, the competition for patents among firms has intensified, and the number of patent disputes have been steadily increasing. Patent disputes, which cause enormous expense and resource utilization, increase uncertainty and have been considered as a threat or problem for the firms involved. Patent disputes are expected to have a significant impact on the decision making about subsequent innovation activities. This study attempts to analyze the effect of patent disputes on the subsequent innovative activities of the firms that are sued. After experiencing litigation as defendants, we examine their subsequent patenting strategies. According to the results of the study, firms who are experiencing patent litigation are more likely to achieve high-quality patents and cite recent technology when they apply for patents. Meanwhile, patent litigation experience has been shown to negatively affect the amount of subsequent patents applied. This study increases understanding by examining whether patent disputes, which have been mainly recognized negatively as obstacles, can be an opportunity that comes during a crisis.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.123-148
• /
• 1998

Recently many controversies originate for varies reasons, ranging from normal market competition to honest disagreements about rights. Disputes also arise from the clash between institutions and individuals. A free society should provide many systems for resolving controversies. We think of the courts as being primary, but, of course, they are not. In Korea, and in most other parts of the world, disagreements are resolved informally, without the need for judicial intervention. Settlements are worked out privately, usually without lawyers and certainly without judges. Most of judges are finding it difficult to cope with the needs and demands of society. Many businessmen who no longer want to get involved in lawsuits, are looking for alternative methods for resolving their disputes. However, there are actually two systems, litigation and arbitration only, to resolve disputes with binding both parties concerned. Litigation emphasizes on the equity and the justice with allowing three time's judgment for the resonable resolution, and arbitration, which is not subject to appeal, stress on the economic settlement rather than justice. Arbitration process results in a final and binding decisions. Although arbitration is a voluntary procedures that is created by the parties themselves, arbitration differs from mediation and conciliation because of its binding power. Arbitration is today coming into fashion as our primary methods for settling disputes. No company wants to have its funds tied up for long periods. Many parties prefer that the decision be final, rather than facing the prospect of extended appellate litigation. Therefore, government must encourage parties to settle their disputes by arbitration instead of litigation.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.179-211
• /
• 2007

To succeed the claim of medical malpractice litigation, the patient as a plaintiff should establish the medical fault of a physician as a defendant, and the causation between the fault and damages. Because of the extraordinary nature of medical province, however, this application of a legal principles is rigorous with the patient. In addition, given the causation between the validation of physician's fault and damage is not attested, patient is not awarded anything. In order to overcome a difficulty of patient's verification and ensure the right to fair process, it was demonstrated the lightening of burden of proof in medical malpractice litigation and the acceptance of the responsibility for an illegal act in a prescribed range in the absence of the causation between the physician's fault and damage. This paper deals with the judgement of causation and burden of proof in medical malpractice litigation, and the acceptance of responsibility in the absence of the causation between the physician's fault and damage. Also, this study recommends a tendency of our precedent through the comparative case method of ours and Japan.

• Journal of Information Management
• /
• v.37 no.4
• /
• pp.141-159
• /
• 2006

This paper presents the response strategy taken by the both parties who possess and infringe the patent rights in the case of patent litigation occurring in local companies. It is common that many entrepreneurs suffer from patent judgment litigation related to the intellectual property rights. Response strategy on the standpoints of patentees and trespassers are discussed in several cases such as infringement and abuse of patent rights, divulgence of trade secret and invention during employment in small & medium sized enterprises.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.69-89
• /
• 2021

General lawsuits can be chosen as a method of resolving patent disputes. However, a significant amount of time and money is wasted on litigation until the dispute is resolved. The Intellectual Property Framework Act in Korea requires the government to simplify litigation procedures and improve litigation systems to resolve intellectual property disputes quickly and fairly. As a result, accurate and timely resolution of patent disputes is given importance by the Korean government. Interest in arbitration as an alternative method of dispute resolution is growing. Although dispute resolution through arbitration is effective, the issue of resolving patent disputes through arbitration can lead to the arbitrability of patent disputes. It is therefore necessary to examine arbitrability of patent contracts and validity disputes. Korea has made efforts to reflect the model arbitration law of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law for quick judicial resolution of patent disputes. Korea has also strengthened related systems for alternative resolutions. However, improving the arbitration system will necessitate a thorough examination of the systems and practices of the United States which is the country in the forefront of intellectual property. This paper examines the arbitrability of Korea's patent dispute and makes recommendations for more efficient dispute resolution system changes.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.43-83
• /
• 2013

Medical treatment has great potential for conflict. Even the best-trained doctors can commit medical malpractice that result in continuing physical or mental disabilities or even death. Medical conflicts have been increasing over years. The medical conflicts between patient and medical professionals that result from medical professionals' mistakes are often fueled by a violation on the pretext of the injuries form medical malpractice and can lead to litigation. The litigation usually cost a lot of money and time. The extension of the litigation period as well as expensive cost and lack of medical knowledge placing a great burden on patients. Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) is more efficient than litigation. In 1988, the medical dispute mediation system has been introduces as the Act on Remedy for Damage from Medical Accident and Medical Dispute Mediation by Korean Medical Association came into effect after 23 years of enactment efforts. Medical Dispute Mediation Act(hereinafter referred to as the "MDMA") has finally entered into force from 8 April 2012. The purpose of the MDMA is to promptly and fairly redress injuries caused by medical malpractice and create a stable environment for medical services of public health or medical professionals by providing for matters regarding the mediation and arbitration of medical disputes(MDMA ${\S}1$). In an effort to secure the fair, speedy and inexpensive resolution of every malpractice case, the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency(hereinafter referred to as the "K-MEDI") was established. Following the MDMA, the K-MEDI shall endeavor to ensure the medical dispute mediation or arbitration proceedings are conducted in a prompt, fair, and efficient manner, and patients and medical professionals shall attend proceedings in good faith with mutual trust and understanding when they participate in medical dispute mediation or arbitration proceedings.