미국 연방대법원 Halo 판결 이후 미국 특허법상 증액손해배상제도에 대한 법리의 전개양상 - 연방순회항소법원 판결을 중심으로 -

The U.S. Supreme Court had abolished the "two-part test" as a standard of willful infringement adopted by the CAFC through Halo decision in 2016. The Supreme Court had mitigated the standard of enhanced damages by deciding that enhanced damages would award only based on the subjective willfulness. Following the sentencing of the Supreme Court's Halo decision, the CAFC has implemented the judicial policy intended by the Supreme Court by applying the newly adopted standard of enhanced damages to individual cases. First of all, Halo's and Stryker's remanding decisions had reviewed the validity of the previous trial court’s decision in accordance with the purpose of the Supreme Court and then remanded the case to the trial court. In addition, the WBIP’s and Georgetown’s decisions had decided that the district court's decision which calculated enhanced damages on the basis of willful infringement under the “Seagate test” did not abuse the discretion by the standard for the newly adopted by the Supreme Court. Furthermore, the WCM’s and Polara’s decisions had overturned the trial court's decisions on the grounds that the courts calculated enhanced damages based on the Read Factor, but failed to fully explain the grounds for the amount of enhanced damages by failing to faithfully analyze them. In the end, the CAFC’s decisions reflect the purpose of the Supreme Court’s Halo decision which had changed the legal principle on enhanced damages so that enhanced damages can contribute to industrial and economic development in the U.S..