Earticle

초록

영어

The patent is the right for a inventor on protecting his idea absolutely. However, medical (neo-)treatment has been troublesome in the world(esp. in Korea) lately. Generally, man is said that medical treatment is related with human being lift or medical treatment is not related with little necessity of incentive in patent law system. So he grants that medical treatment should never be allowed to patent(right). Even though that is said above, medical treatment is inclined to be granted. For example, that is a invention of contraception's way with taking a little medicine, of hair multiplication etc. One of the same things, the medical deed(treatment) or (neo-)technology medical treatment is a representative. Allowing or not the medical treatment must be thought of the benefit and the opposite on human being. In present, the patent right on a invention has not been allowed to medical treatment invention in Korea. On the contrary, the patent right on a invention has allowed to medical treatment in the EU or United States of America. In Korean Patent Law(§29), a medical treatment invention has regulated no the (domestic) industrial utilization possibility. This regulation is different much than the foreign nations' one. That is, EU(EPC) and U.S.A(Patent Law) etc. on advanced foreign nations patent law system, medical treatment is allowed patent possibility. Because the nations have allowed the industrial utilization possibility on a invention, but restricting within a non-patent reason. On the respect of that, Korean Patent Law(K.P.L is the same below) cannot help being irrational one. In particular, if the article in the Law is codified as the present, the important issue can be said below. (1) The one is the invention of industrial utilization possibility as a patent requirement on the K.P.L §29. The question is the thing that medical treatment is not recognized at the invention of industrial utilization possibility on the K.P.L. (2) The other is the invention not to be recognized as a patent requirement on K.P.L §32. This article had better regulate that medical treatment is a invention of patent right on balancing with advanced nations such as EU or United States of America. After all, I think that the K.P.L should be recognized a medical treatment at industrial utilization possibility invention, and also amended medical treatment as the invention to be recognized at a patent requirement.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말
 Ⅱ. 醫療行爲의 保護實態
  1. 特許法的 保護
  2. 特許審査基準의 運用規定
  3. 具體的 保護의 모습
 Ⅲ. 先進外國의 動向
  1. 國際條約(TRIPS)
  2. 美國
  3. 유럽(EU
  4. 日本
 Ⅳ. (新技術) 醫療行爲의 保護方案
  1. 槪要
  2. 特許法的 保護
  3. 立法論的 保護
 Ⅴ. 맺음말
 참고문헌
 Abstract

키워드

지적재산 특허권 신기술 의료기술 특허요건 의료행위(진단법 치료법 수술법 등) 생명공학 유전자치료 세포복제 특허권제한 intellectual property patent right neo-technology medical technology patent condition medical deed(diagnosis treatment operation etc.) bio-technology genetic technology cell duplicate patent right

저자

• 황근수 [ Hwang Keun-Soo | 법학박사, 전남대ㆍ광주대 등 강사 ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물