logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1970. 7. 24. 선고 70후19 판결
[권리범위확인][집18(2)행,062]
Main Issues

Even if the contents of a utility model registration fall under the public domain, the invalidation of the registration shall not be asserted until a final and conclusive decision on invalidation of the registration becomes final and conclusive.

Summary of Judgment

Even if the contents of a utility model registration belong to the public domain, the invalidation of the registration shall not be asserted until a final and conclusive decision on invalidation of the registration becomes final and conclusive.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 4 of the Utility Model Act; Article 18 of the Utility Model Act; Article 24 of the Utility Model Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 68Hu56 Decided March 4, 1969

Appellant, appellant

Claimant

Respondent-Appellee

appellees

Judgment of the lower court

The Korean Intellectual Property Trial Board

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the appellant.

Reasons

We examine the grounds of appeal by the claimant.

The purport of the Supreme Court Decision 63Hu45 Decided October 22, 1964 is that where new technical device is registered including the reason for public notice, the exclusive right cannot be recognized as a utility model right even to the public part of the registered device. If so, the technical device of the registered utility model right (which is the object of consultation or notification) falls under the public part, as in the case of this case, the above Supreme Court Decision is not applicable. In this regard, even if the original decision was made in this case, even if the contents of the (the utility model registration number omitted) which is the issue of this case are registered and registered as falling under the public part, the invalidation of the registration cannot be asserted until the final decision on invalidation of registration becomes final and conclusive (see Supreme Court Decision 68Hu56, Mar. 4, 1969; Supreme Court Decision 68Hu566, Mar. 4, 196).

Therefore, this appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the participating judges.

The presiding judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge)

arrow
본문참조조문
기타문서