Case Analysis / Legal Updates

This case concerned whether, in determining a violation of the Trademark Act, a trademark consisting solely of a map constitutes a ground for refusal of registration. The Supreme Court held that it constituted a ‘violation of the Trademark Act.’

Intellectual property infringement This judgment addressed whether, when a creditor claims only a portion of damages for infringement of an exclusive non-exclusive license (a Korea-specific intellectual-property concept: a non-exclusive license granted on an exclusive basis under which the licensor undertakes not to license others, with no exact common-law equivalent) in a damages action, the amount claimed must be specified for each damages claim.

This is a Supreme Court judgment that assessed a physician's occupational negligence in a medical malpractice case. The Court held that a physician who discharged a patient without confirming the test results, leading to the patient's death, did not commit occupational negligence.

This is a judgment of the Supreme Court concerning a former member of the National Assembly who sued reporters, alleging that their articles constituted defamation (criminal defamation under Korean law, broader than common-law defamation in that even true statements may be punishable) by false statements. The Supreme Court determined that it was difficult to recognize the articles as defamation by false statements.

This is a Supreme Court judgment concerning performance of a non-existent obligation in a lawsuit for the return of unjust enrichment. The Supreme Court found that remuneration paid without a general meeting resolution cannot be regarded as performance of a non-existent obligation and constitutes unjust enrichment.

This is a Supreme Court judgment that accepted the objection raised by the defendants regarding the method of valuing hospitality in a violation of the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act. The following examines the Supreme Court's method of valuing the hospitality received by a public official.

An industrial accident fatality occurred, and the business owner of the site was acquitted of the charge under the Serious Accidents Punishment Act (a 2022 Korean statute imposing criminal liability on business operators for serious safety accidents, with no direct common-law equivalent). In the first acquittal rendered under the Serious Accidents Punishment Act, the court focused on the fact that the construction amount was under 5 billion won.

During the collection of evidence by an investigative agency in connection with a violation of the Narcotics Control Act, the Supreme Court found that evidence collected from a non-party who could not understand the procedure was unlawful, and it reversed and remanded the lower judgment.

The Supreme Court issued a judgment reversing and remanding the lower judgment that had granted a claim for past child support. The Supreme Court held that the lower court had not considered the parties' financial circumstances or the fairness of the allocation of the burden.

This case study on patent litigation illustrates the importance of the specification description requirements. A petition for an invalidation trial was filed (a request contesting an administrative action before an agency prior to court litigation, comparable to seeking administrative review) because the patent specification requirements were not satisfied, and the Supreme Court granted the petition.

This is an analysis of a district court judgment holding that severance pay must also be paid to an undocumented foreign worker who filed a wage claim lawsuit.

Company H, where an industrial fatality occurred, was found through a special inspection by the Ministry of Employment and Labor to have violated 61 provisions of laws including the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and it received an administrative fine of KRW 265.55 million.