대한민국 특허제도의 문제점(Ⅴ) ―법령의 미비와 법령운용의 미비에 대하여―

There are many inadequate and deficient provisions in the Korean Patent Law, Patent Regulations, Patent Implementing Regulations, MPEP, etc. For instance, the description requirements under Article 42, Section 2 of the Korean Patent Law are violated by the Patent Implementing Regulations in which provides the electronic filing format of specification. There are many complicated provisions that could have been simplified and clarified as well as excessive mutatis mutandis provisions that could have been simplified. Further, there are no provisions regarding the definition of open-ended type claim and closed type claim which should have been provided. The test of obviousness of an invention should be more thoroughly understood. The test should be objective and specific rather than subjective and ambiguous. The 3-step test for obviousness and the four-step factual inquiry including secondary considerations will lead to a right test for obviousness.