The meaning of the interested person under Article 97(2) of the Patent Act

An interested party under Article 97 (2) of the Patent Act means a person who conducts the business of manufacturing and selling goods by executing the invention of the patent, or a person who, in the nature of his business, can inferredly use the invention of the patent in question by virtue of the nature of his business, and the interested person includes a person who is likely to have an objection against the patent right holder, and therefore, is likely to be damaged or to be damaged later.

Article 97(2) of the Patent Act

Supreme Court Decision 77Hu50 Decided March 13, 1979; 85Hu51 Decided July 23, 1985

Patent Attorney Kang Dong-soo, Counsel for defendant-appellant

Taesan Forest and Urban Community Corporation

Korean Intellectual Property Office No. 25 decided on February 27, 1985

The original adjudication shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the Korean Intellectual Property Trial Office.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the records, since the claimant's patent (patent registration number omitted) applied for and registered as a patentee was publicly known prior to the filing of the patent application, the trial decision of the claimant's petition of this case seeking confirmation of invalidity of the above patent is dismissed on the ground that the claimant is not only a person engaged in stock breeding but also a feed producer who manufactures and sells feed for the purpose of sale, and it is not a feed producer. Thus, the claimant's petition of this case cannot be an interested party who can file the petition of this case.

2. However, according to Article 97(2) of the Patent Act, the adjudication on invalidation of a patent as in this case can only be requested by interested parties and examiners. The interested parties under the above Act refer to those who conduct the business of manufacturing and selling goods by executing the invention in question or those who can be inferred to use the invention in question by nature of their business, and those who are likely to be contested against the interests of the patent right holders. Thus, the interested parties include those who are likely to suffer losses or to suffer losses later (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 85Hu51, Jul. 23, 1985; 7Hu50, Mar. 13, 1979). According to the records, the claimant is a livestock farmer and is entitled to seek the adjudication on invalidation of a patent as in this case as in this case, because he uses or prepares legitimate production costs such as manufacturing factories in order to use them for feed for which he intends to raise and sell, which are the contents of the patent in this case.

As seen above, the court below rejected the appeal of this case on the ground that the claimant cannot be an interested party in this case, which affected the result of the original decision due to the misapprehension of legal principles as to the interested party in the patent invalidation trial, and therefore, the argument about this point is reasonable. Therefore, the original decision of this case cannot be reversed without examining other grounds for appeal.

3. Therefore, the original adjudication shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the appellate trial office, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Lee-hee (Presiding Justice)