特許爭訟制度의 立法論的 改善方案에 關한 硏究 = (A) study of the patent contestation system on the remedy of legislation argument

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

These days all parts of the world makes an effort to innovate patent technique providing 'The Patent War'. Not only Japan which is close to Korea as well as U.S. prepare a technical sudden attack that is unexpected, but also protect new technology that is developed their native land to increase balance of technical trade and pitch to seek rights and interests for it.
In Japan, Koizumi Prime Minister presents necessity of "Protect and conjugate result of study and creation act as intellectual property and strengthen international competitive power of Japanese industry" and he will make the society of creative brain competition including to show Japanese ability in a field of invention and creation for international competitive power, increasing employment opportunity, the spread of the technique trade balance. It is counterevidence that Japan creates 'the founding of a state of intellectual property' on a nation goal.
However, we are insufficient situation to support developers timely who want to take rights and interests by patent adjudgment and revocation suit. Therefore, we urgently need thesises of existing system of the patent contestation.
Now, it is the situation that we should reduce the consumed time and effort as patent and civil court have control each of the patent adjudgment and revocation suit, even though existing a rank of high court of justice exists, and need positive organization maintenance for strengthening industry competitive power of the knowledge property right. There is a conflict among the attorneys, even now, and lots of controversy have been engendered as patent court do not perform the role.
Even though, patent adjudgment, in substance, have a vicarious character of the first trial of patent court in the current patent contestation, it does not satisfy a specialty and separation. And despite patent court that has a character of a rank of high court of justice, it is a important problem that we must not to delay to make certain their specialty and separation in that it could not reasonablenessly, fairly, rapidly, and economically settle the dispute about the patent contestation that the civil court takes charge of the patent revocation suit.
The intellectual property which is the technetronic new right is expanding to product and service on the lines of technical growth and society needs, and create an enormous fortune as important a weapon and a defence measure for privates, enterprises, and nations. To confront the right way, we need to be firm maintenance of internal related regimes and laws under the national circumstance transcending internal problems and spreading among countries.
In this research, we synthetically and concretely treats a matter of legislation argument reform about dispute of knowledge property rights which occupy an important position of knowledge property rights.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차 = ⅰ
• 第1章 序論 = 1
• Ⅰ. 硏究의 目的 = 1
• Ⅱ. 硏究의 範圍 및 方法 = 3
• 1. 硏究의 範圍 = 3
• 2. 硏究의 方法 = 4
• 第2章 特許爭訟制度의 槪觀 = 6
• Ⅰ. 特許爭訟制度의 意義 = 6
• 1. 爭訟對象으로서의 産業財産權 = 6
• 2. 權益救濟手段으로서의 特許爭訟 = 7
• Ⅱ. 特許爭訟制度와 一般行政爭訟制度의 比較(差異) = 8
• Ⅲ. 우리나라의 現行 特許爭訟制度 = 8
• 1. 序言 = 8
• 2. 特許審判制度 = 10
• 3. 特許訴訟制度 = 12
• 4. 代理制度 = 14
• 5. 檢討 = 14
• 第3章 外國의 特許爭訟制度 = 17
• Ⅰ. 日本 = 17
• 1. 序言 = 17
• 2. 特許審判과 狹義의 特許訴訟 = 17
• 가. 特許廳 審判所의 特許審判 = 17
• 나. 東京高等裁判所의 審決取消訴訟 = 18
• 3. 特許侵害訴訟 = 19
• 4. 代理制度 = 20
• Ⅱ. 獨逸 = 21
• 1. 序言 = 21
• 2. 特許爭訟制度 = 22
• 3. 代理制度 = 23
• Ⅲ. 美國 = 25
• 1. 序言 = 25
• 2. CAFC 時代의 特許爭訟 = 25
• 3. 代理制度 = 28
• Ⅳ. 英國 = 29
• 1. 序言 = 29
• 2. 特許爭訟制度 = 29
• 3. 代理制度 = 31
• Ⅴ. 檢討 = 31
• 1. 特許爭訟制度 = 31
• 2. 代理制度 = 33
• 第4章 特許爭訟制度의 問題點 및 改善方案 = 34
• Ⅰ. 特許爭訟制度의 問題點 = 34
• 1. 訴訟 代理上의 專門性 缺如 = 34
• 2. 特許侵害訴訟의 第1審 管轄 問題 = 35
• 3. 管轄의 分裂 = 35
• 4. 特許法院으로의 侵害訴訟 管轄集中의 問題 = 38
• 가. 管轄集中에 대한 反對意見 = 38
• 나. 管轄集中에 대한 贊成意見 = 45
• 5. 專門性이 缺如된 特許法院 = 46
• Ⅱ. 特許爭訟制度의 立法論的 改善方案 = 48
• 1. 紛爭 擔當機關의 改善方案 = 48
• 2. 代理制度에 대한 立法論的 方案 = 50
• 3. 特許侵害訴訟의 第1審 管轄集中을 통한 效率性 圖謀 = 53
• 4. 特許法院의 管轄擴大 = 55
• 5. 專門審判機關으로서의 特許法院 = 61
• 弟5章 結論 = 63
• 〈參考文獻〉 = 66
• Abstract = 70