메뉴 건너뛰기
Library Notice
Institutional Access
If you certify, you can access the articles for free.
Check out your institutions.
ex)Hankuk University, Nuri Motors
Log in Register Help KOR
Subject

Requirements of Unregistered Design Protection under the Unfair Competition Prevention Act - Establishment of the Interpretation Theory of Article 2, No. 1 〈Item ZA〉 of the Act as Seen through Supreme Court Judgments Since 2016 -
Recommendations
Search
Questions

부정경쟁방지법에 의한 미등록 디자인 보호의 요건 - 2016년 이후 대법원 판결들을 통해 본, 법 제2조 1호 〈자목〉 해석론 정립 -

논문 기본 정보

Type
Academic journal
Author
KIM Wonoh (인하대학교)
Journal
The Institute of Legal Studies Inha University Inha Law Review : The Institute of Legal Studies Inha University Vol.25 No.3 KCI Accredited Journals
Published
2022.9
Pages
317 - 358 (42page)
DOI
10.22789/IHLR.2022.09.25.3.10

Usage

cover
📌
Topic
📖
Background
🔬
Method
🏆
Result
Requirements of Unregistered Design Protection under the Unfair Competition Prevention Act - Establishment of the Interpretation Theory of Article 2, No. 1 〈Item ZA〉 of the Act as Seen through Supreme Court Judgments Since 2016 -
Ask AI
Recommendations
Search
Questions

Abstract· Keywords

Report Errors
The so-called ‘product configuration Imitation prohibition regulation’ (Item ZA) is a regulation enacted by Japan in 1993 with reference to Japanese law and legislated by Korea in 2004, and is maintained without any special amendments. As a corresponding regulation, the EU has an unregistered design protection regulation. Recently, as product configuration imitation became the subject of administrative investigation by the special judicial police authority of the Korean Intellectual Property Office, the Korean Intellectual Property Office"s guidelines also appeared, and its importance is being emphasized again. However, the understanding of the status or essence of this regulation is still insufficient, and the judgment method or standard cannot be regarded as established one. With the recent appearance of a series of Supreme Court rulings, we are now at the stage of trying to form our own jurisprudence through rational interpretation. At the same time, it is a provision that also has legislative issues, so it is necessary to consider the nature of the provision to set the standard for interpretation. Therefore, in this study, first, by comparing adjacent regulations and other legislative cases, we first look at matters concerning the nature and status of 〈Item ZA〉 in the protection of (unregistered) product designs, etc. In order to review the rules once again, the overall interpretation of the regulations was reviewed, focusing on the three Supreme Court precedents and the domestic lower court precedents. At the same time, the application requirements of this subparagraph were divided into active and passive requirements ; the later such as normal form, limited period of protection, and the former such as related to the subject of claim and the scope or category of the object of protection. Finally, by comparing with other legislative cases, the problems of legislative theory and the direction of the revision were presented.

Contents

국문초록
Ⅰ. 서설
Ⅱ. 2016년 이후 형태모방 관련 대법원판결 개관
Ⅲ. 형태모방 규정(자목)의 역할과 기능
Ⅳ. 적극적 적용요건의 쟁점 검토
Ⅴ. 소극적 적용요건의 쟁점 검토
Ⅵ. 결론
참고문헌
ABSTRACT

References (0)

Add References

Recommendations

It is an article recommended by DBpia according to the article similarity. Check out the related articles!

Related Authors

Frequently Viewed Together

Recently viewed articles

Comments(0)

0

Write first comments.

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2023-360-000056329