종류가 다른 ‘권리 대 권리’의 적극적 권리범위확인심판에서 확인의 이익의 존부

Since the existence of the benefit of confirmation in the trial for confirmation of the scope of rights is an ex officio investigation, the Patent Tribunal or the court must judge ex officio regardless of whether the parties claim it or not. Until now, the Supreme Court has established the principle of 'no active judgment and no passive judgment' in principle with respect to trials to confirm the scope of rights between rights. However, even if the Supreme Court requests a trial to confirm the scope of rights between rights, it is allowed exceptionally when both inventions are in a relationship of use. On the other hand, the Supreme Court takes the attitude that the passive scope of rights confirmation trial cannot be considered inappropriate because it does not result in denying the validity of the registered rights. However, as in this case, there was no precedent that directly addressed the issue of whether there was a benefit of confirmation as a legal requirement for an active scope confirmation trial between rights of different fields with different targets, registration requirements, and methods of determining the scope of protection between the two rights. The target judgment is a case in which the defendant (claimer) requested a trial to confirm the scope of rights with the plaintiff's implementation plan as the subject of confirmation in order to confirm the scope of protection of the registration design as the utility model right holder. Accordingly, the Plaintiff (the Respondent) argued to the effect that it was inappropriate as it corresponds to an active scope of rights between rights and rights based on the post-registration designs 1 and 2, which are other types of rights registered after registration of the above registration design. The target judgment is significant in that it was the first to judge that the benefit of confirmation could not be denied because it constitutes an active scope confirmation trial of rights to rights, even if it does not result in the denial of the registration effect of the registration right holder of the right to confirmation based on the results of the judgment of the scope confirmation trial. In other words, the target judgment is significant in that it clearly states that a trial to confirm the scope of active rights between rights of different fields with different protection targets, registration requirements, and methods of determining the scope of protection has the benefit of confirmation in principle and cannot be concluded to be uniformly inappropriate.