일본의 지적재산권침해소송에서 국제재판관할권의 문제

International Jurisdiction in Intellectual Property Dispute of Japan

The Intellectual Property High Court of Japan ruled that the fact that a Korean Company sold goods to Japanese consumers on the Internet was considered illegal because a Japanese company had a patent on the goods in Japan, therefore it recognized that a court of Japan had the international jurisdiction regarding the case. In 2011 after this judgment, the Code of Civil Procedure of Japan was amended for incorporating provisions on international jurisdiction in order to clarify whether a court of Japan would have jurisdiction in the property litigation with international element. On the other hand, Korea has determined the international jurisdiction on the base of Article 2(1) of Korean Private International Law, which provides that when a party or a matter in international dispute has substantial relevance to Korea, a court of Korea would have jurisdiction. Also judges on the substantial relevance depends on the reasonable rule corresponding to the idea of an international jurisdiction allocation. The term "substantial relevance" means that a party or a matter in dispute has relevance with Korea to the extent which Koran court shall be justified to exercise the jurisdiction. And it is interpreted that more specific things should be assessed comprehensively in each case, and also if the case is about international jurisdiction, the theory on special circumstances may refer to it. However, in that the event of infringement on the Internet is actually not easy to judge the relevance, the examples of Japan introduced in this paper are thought to be a good reference to the future Korean legislation.