본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

상표침해소송과 상표권남용항변

Trademark Misuse in the Trademark Rights Infringement Litigation

차상육
IT와 법연구소 (IT & Law Research Institute)|2016.02|IT와 법연구 (IT&LAW REVIEW)|제12호|pp. 121-185

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

상표권남용권리남용항변신의칙위반상표침해소송무효원인의 명백성trademark misusetrademark infringement actiona clear evidence of invaliditya violation of a principle of good faitha defence of misuse of right

초록

Due to its own nature, trademark rights are easy to front 'Abuse of Right' defense in litigation procedure. And alleged infringers tend to ride on such 'Abuse of Right' defense against trade mark enforcement which inevitably conflicts with existing credit accumulated by a third party. To endow predictability to trademark rights enforcement, it is critical to establish objective and systematic standard of trademark abuse determination. This article proposes to classify trademark rights abuse into two categories: 'Trademark law type' and 'Civil law type'. First, a typical case of the legal principle of trademark abuse based on trademark law itself is as follows; On October 18, 2012, the Korean Supreme Court("KSC") rendered an en banc decision which held that, even before the invalidity of a trademark is confirmed, where there is a clear case of invalidity, an injunction action or a damages claim based on said trademark will not be permitted as it constitutes a misuse of right, barring any special circumstances. And where there is a defence of misuse of right, the court seized of the infringement claim may examine and rule on the invalidity thereof as a precondition to examine the existence of any misuse by the trademark holder (Korean Supreme Court Decision en banc, Case No. 2010 Da 103000, October 18, 2012). Second, the conventional civil law type abuse defense is still available as long as it meets the strict case law standards. Judges ought to declare abuse of right denying enforceability of trademark rights when the exercise of trademark rights is against principle of good faith and public order in Korean courts. In sum, this article will highlight the pressing need for the adoption of the trademark misuse defense. In a case such as above, Judges ought to declare abuse of right denying enforceability of trademark rights when the law programmed to limit the right for its inherent legal goal. And then we look to the public policies underlying trademark protection, and design a multi-factor test that strives to achieve a balance between flexibility and predictability.

Abstract

Due to its own nature, trademark rights are easy to front 'Abuse of Right' defense in litigation procedure. And alleged infringers tend to ride on such 'Abuse of Right' defense against trade mark enforcement which inevitably conflicts with existing credit accumulated by a third party. To endow predictability to trademark rights enforcement, it is critical to establish objective and systematic standard of trademark abuse determination. This article proposes to classify trademark rights abuse into two categories: 'Trademark law type' and 'Civil law type'. First, a typical case of the legal principle of trademark abuse based on trademark law itself is as follows; On October 18, 2012, the Korean Supreme Court("KSC") rendered an en banc decision which held that, even before the invalidity of a trademark is confirmed, where there is a clear case of invalidity, an injunction action or a damages claim based on said trademark will not be permitted as it constitutes a misuse of right, barring any special circumstances. And where there is a defence of misuse of right, the court seized of the infringement claim may examine and rule on the invalidity thereof as a precondition to examine the existence of any misuse by the trademark holder (Korean Supreme Court Decision en banc, Case No. 2010 Da 103000, October 18, 2012). Second, the conventional civil law type abuse defense is still available as long as it meets the strict case law standards. Judges ought to declare abuse of right denying enforceability of trademark rights when the exercise of trademark rights is against principle of good faith and public order in Korean courts. In sum, this article will highlight the pressing need for the adoption of the trademark misuse defense. In a case such as above, Judges ought to declare abuse of right denying enforceability of trademark rights when the law programmed to limit the right for its inherent legal goal. And then we look to the public policies underlying trademark protection, and design a multi-factor test that strives to achieve a balance between flexibility and predictability.

참고문헌 (35)

  1. 계승균, "로스쿨 지적재산권법" (2010), 법문사
  2. 곽윤직, "민법주해(Ⅰ), 총칙(1)" (2000), 박영사
  3. 김상용, "민법총직" (2003), 법문사
  4. 나종갑, "미국상표법연구" (2006), 글누리(한남대학교출판부)
  5. 송영식, "송영식 지적소유권법(하)" (2013), 육법사
  6. 정재훈, "공정거래법 소송실무" (2015), 육법사
  7. 지원림, "민법강의" (2015), 홍문사
  8. 강헌, "특허권 남용에 관한 연구", 경영법률, 23(2), pp.563~584 (2013), 한국경영법률학회
  9. 권영준, "특허권 남용의 법리와 그 관련 문제", 산업재산권, (36), pp.175~226 (2011), 한국지식재산학회
  10. 김천수, "權利濫用과 權利行使上 信義則 - 要件論을 中心으로 -", 민사판례연구, (32), pp.1~51 (2010), 민사판례연구회
  11. 박준석, "특허권 등 지적재산권의 남용을 긍정한 우리 판례들의 논리분석", 민사판례연구, (34), pp.993~1064 (2012), 민사판례연구회
  12. 박찬주, "權利濫用禁止와 權利者의 主觀的 要件", 인권과 정의, (386), pp.6~25 (2008), 대한변호사협회
  13. 오영준, "대법원판례해설 제69호(2007 상반기)" (2007), 법원도서관
  14. 유대종, "상표무효사유와 상표권 남용에 관한 소고", 산업재산권, (30), pp.257~294 (2009), 한국지식재산학회
  15. 이동형, "권리남용 성립요건의 판단방법과 기준- 대법원 2008. 9. 25. 선고 2007다5397 판결 -", 법조, 58(11), pp.384~421 (2009), 법조협회
  16. 정태호, "상표권 남용에 관한 판례의 유형별 고찰: 한국과 일본의 판례를 중심으로", 지식재산연구, 9(3), pp.203~240 (2014), 한국지식재산연구원
  17. 정태호, "무효사유가 있는 상표권에 대한 권리남용의 적용상의 문제점 - 보충성 요건의 고려를 중심으로 -", 선진상사법률연구, (63), pp.52~79 (2013), 법무부
  18. 차상육, "표준필수특허에 기초한 금지청구권 행사의 제한 가능성 -한국과 미국 판례의 대비적 분석을 중심으로-", 지식재산연구, 10(4), pp.61~108 (2015), 한국지식재산연구원
  19. 차상육, "특허침해소송과 권리남용항변", 정보법학, 11(2), pp.163~210 (2007), 한국정보법학회
  20. 최승재, "상표침해소송에서 무효사유에 기한 청구기각의 가부 ―판례의 유형화와 대법원 2012.10.18.선고 2010다103000 전원합의체 판결―", 창작과 권리, (69), pp.99~129 (2012), 세창출판사
  21. 최승재, "저작권 및 상표권 남용행위에 대한 연구 - “지식재산권의 부당한 행사에 대한 심사지침(2010년)” 개정을 위하여 -", 법조, 60(4), pp.158~202 (2011), 법조협회
  22. 지식재산권의 부당한 행사에 대한 심사지침 개선방안 연구, "공정거래위원회", ~ (2014)
  23. Ashlyn J. Lembree, "Federal Trademark & Copyright Registration Practice course materials, Spring 2009" (2009), Franklin Pierce Law Center
  24. "ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property Misuse" (2000), American Bar Association
  25. "Trademark Misuse : Crafting a Safety Valve for a Normatively Deficient Body of Law" (2012)[URL]
  26. William E. Ridgway, "Revitalizing the Doctrine of Trademark Misuse", Berkeley Tech. L. J, 21, pp.1547~ (2006)
  27. 高部眞規子, "著作權・商標・不競法關係訴訟の實務" (2015), 商事法務
  28. 知的財産裁判實務硏究會, "知的財産訴訟の實務" (2014), 法曹會
  29. 小野昌延, "新・商標法槪說" (2014), 靑林書院
  30. 小野昌延, "商標の法律相談" (2009), 靑林書院
  31. 渋谷達紀, "知的財産法講義Ⅲ" (2008), 有斐閣
  32. 小野昌延, "上卷" (2006), 靑林書院
  33. 田村善之, "機能的知的財産法の理論" (1996), 信山社
  34. 宮脇正晴, "商標法におけるキルビー抗弁・権利行使制限の抗弁（特104条の3抗弁）に関する問題点", パテント, 63(2) (2010)
  35. 潮海久雄, "別冊ジュリスト　商標 · 意匠·不正競爭判例百選, No.188" (2007), 有斐閣

관련 논문AI추천

상표권 남용의 성립요건에 관한 대법원 판례의 검토이동형민사법의 이론과 실무학회 · 민사법의 이론과 실무2013 · 제16권 제2호상표권 남용에 관한 판례의 유형별 고찰: 한국과 일본의 판례를 중심으로정태호한국지식재산연구원 · 지식재산연구2014 · 제9권 제3호상표권 효력제한으로서의 권리남용 항변장현승법학연구소 · The Journal of Law & IP2020 · 제10권 제2호Controlling Patent Abuse in Korea박성수한국정보법학회 · 정보법학2007 · 제11권 제1호특허침해소송에서의 권리남용의 적용에 대한 비판적 고찰정태호법학연구원 · 법학논총2012 · 제29권 제4호상표권침해로 인한 손해배상청구권에 관한 연구 － 당사자가 수인인 경우를 중심으로 －강헌한국경영법률학회 · 경영법률2009 · 제19권 제3호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)

IT 패션과 지적재산권육소영pp. 1-31외주제작 방송프로그램의 저작권 귀속에 관한 연구박성호pp. 33-82무권리자 출원‧특허와 정당한 권리자의 보호김동준pp. 83-120저작재산권 제한규정의 계약에 의한 배제 - 저작재산권 제한규정의 강행규정성 여부에 관한 해외법제의 동향 -김경숙pp. 187-215디지털헬스케어환경에서 개인정보의 활용과 규제의 합리적 조화방안 연구김현경, 김수영pp. 217-263
원문 보기