Decisions

All

TITLE	Supreme Court Decision 2009Da75178 Decided July 28, 2011 [Compensation for Employee Invention] [full Text]
Summary
[1] Criteria to determine whether a person is considered to be a joint inventor [2] In a case where Gap worked at Eul corporation as Project Leader in charge of product development for Pyribenzoxim and other herbicides, contributed to full-scale commercialization of Pyribenzoxim by directly involving himself in various experiments and, upon learning that commercialization of another herbicide candidates manufactured by Byung's research team in the Korea Research Institute of Chemical Technology had been suspended at the product development stage due to its high level of toxicity, proposed joint research to solve this toxicity issue, eventually allowing Eul corporation to complete its patented invention for a herbicidal emulsion composite and patented invention for a herbicidal pyridine sulphonylurea, the Court affirmed the judgment of the court below to acknowledge Gap as joint inventor for the above inventions [3] The extinctive period for a compensation claim to an employee invention (=10 years) and the point that the period begins to run [4] The meaning of ""profit realized by the employer,"" as stipulated in Article 40 (2) of the former Patent Act to consider when assessing compensation amounts for an employee invention

TITLE

Supreme Court Decision 2009Da75178 Decided July 28, 2011 [Compensation for Employee Invention] [full Text]

Summary

[1] Criteria to determine whether a person is considered to be a joint inventor [2] In a case where Gap worked at Eul corporation as Project Leader in charge of product development for Pyribenzoxim and other herbicides, contributed to full-scale commercialization of Pyribenzoxim by directly involving himself in various experiments and, upon learning that commercialization of another herbicide candidates manufactured by Byung's research team in the Korea Research Institute of Chemical Technology had been suspended at the product development stage due to its high level of toxicity, proposed joint research to solve this toxicity issue, eventually allowing Eul corporation to complete its patented invention for a herbicidal emulsion composite and patented invention for a herbicidal pyridine sulphonylurea, the Court affirmed the judgment of the court below to acknowledge Gap as joint inventor for the above inventions [3] The extinctive period for a compensation claim to an employee invention (=10 years) and the point that the period begins to run [4] The meaning of ""profit realized by the employer,"" as stipulated in Article 40 (2) of the former Patent Act to consider when assessing compensation amounts for an employee invention

Prev	Supreme Court Decision 2011Do6507 Decided August 25, 2011 [Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud).Fraud.Uttering of Falsified Private Document]
Next	Supreme Court Decision 2010Hu3080 Decided July 28, 2011 [Cancellation of Decision to Revoke Trademark Registration]

list