특허청구범위 해석에 있어서 일원론과 이원론에 대한 타당성 검토

There are two standards for claim construction: (a) claims must be read in view of the specification; and (b) It is improper to read a limitation from the specification into the claims. These two standards generally apply in the same way for both judging the requirements for patentability and for judging patent infringement. However, in some cases when the claim language is broader than the embodiment, these two standards are applied differently for judging the requirements for patentability and judging patent infringement. During judging the requirements for patentability, the Patent Office must give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification and it is improper to import claim limitations from the specification. Because the applicant has the opportunity to amend the claims during prosecution, giving a claim its broadest reasonable interpretation will reduce the possibility that the claim, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified. But during judging a patent infringement, it is proper to import claim limitations from the specification. This is because it is against the principle of the patent system to give a right to the invention that was not disclosed in the specification by the patent owner. Therefore, in some cases, claims may be construed in the same way for judging the requirements for patentability and for judging patent infringement. In some other cases, claims may not be construed in the same.