{"id":138636,"date":"2026-04-08T13:43:12","date_gmt":"2026-04-08T13:43:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/?post_type=comparative_guide&#038;p=138636"},"modified":"2026-04-08T13:43:12","modified_gmt":"2026-04-08T13:43:12","slug":"south-korea-trademark-disputes","status":"publish","type":"comparative_guide","link":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/chapter\/south-korea-trademark-disputes\/","title":{"rendered":"South Korea: Trademark Disputes"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-138636","comparative_guide","type-comparative_guide","status-publish","hentry","guides-trademark-disputes","jurisdictions-south-korea"],"acf":[],"appp":{"post_list":{"below_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">Cho &amp; Partners<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2026\/04\/03_LOGO_RR.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>"},"post_detail":{"above_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">Cho &amp; Partners<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2026\/04\/03_LOGO_RR.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>","below_title":"<span class=\"guide-intro\">This country specific Q&amp;A provides an overview of Trademark Disputes laws and regulations applicable in South Korea<\/span><div class=\"guide-content\"><div class=\"filter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t<input type=\"text\" placeholder=\"Search questions and answers...\" class=\"filter-container__search-field\">\r\n\t\t\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<ol class=\"custom-counter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">To represent a client before Court in respect of a potential trademark infringement matter, do you require a Power of Attorney \u2013 and if so, what are the execution formalities required by your courts?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>To represent a foreign entity before a Korean court, two documents are needed: (i) a Power of Attorney and (ii) a document called Corporate Nationality Certificate which certifies the entity\u2019s country of incorporation and the signatory\u2019s authority to act on behalf of the entity.\u00a0 The POA requires a signature only (no legalization or legalization) and the Corporate Nationality Certificate requires notarization, and originals of both documents should be submitted.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is it a requirement in your jurisdiction to send a cease and desist letter to a potential infringer before commencing proceedings for infringement? What are the consequences for a trademark owner who chooses not to send a pre-action letter?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, it is not a requirement in South Korea to send a cease and desist letter to a potential infringer before commencing proceedings for infringement.\u00a0 However, it is general practice to send a cease and desist letter first as it shows the court that the plaintiff attempted to resolve this matter in good faith through a settlement before resorting to legal proceedings.\u00a0 Making contact with an infringer outside of court can also help avoid costly legal proceedings through an amicable settlement.\u00a0 And in the case of a criminal complaint, the cease and desist letter will give the defendant notice of the infringing activity for the establishment of criminal intent.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your jurisdiction, is there a risk that a pre-action letter could give rise to claim against the trademark owner for unjustified threats? What steps should a trademark owner take to ensure any cease and desist letter does not expose the trademark owner to any liability.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, there is no statutory \u201cunjustified threats\u201d ground under South Korean law.\u00a0 Though uncommon, a cease and desist letter may result in liability for civil tort under the Korean Civil Act if the letter is unfounded or sent in bad faith, and interference with business under the Korean Criminal Act if the letter contains false accusations, threats, or disruption of commercial relationships.\u00a0 Trademark owners should ensure that the grounds asserted in the letter are valid, avoid defamatory or coercive wording, and dissemination of letter to anyone but the potential infringer.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is it mandatory for the parties to have attempted mediation or other alternative dispute resolution proceedings prior to commencing infringement proceedings? If so, what is the minimum expectation?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, there is no mandatory requirement to attempt mediation or other resolution proceedings prior to initiating legal proceedings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are claims for trademark infringements heard before a general commercial Court or a specialist Court focused on Intellectual Property disputes? Are trademark infringement claims decided by a judge or by a jury?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>All civil cases in South Korea are decided exclusively by judges or panels of judges.\u00a0 The first court of instance for trademark infringement cases is the district courts, and appeals are heard before the Patent Court\u201d.\u00a0 The final appeal lies with the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there a time limit for commencing trademark infringement proceedings once the facts giving rise to the infringement are known to the trademark owner. After how long would such a claim be time-barred? What action would a trade mark owner have to know to give rise to such a claim being time-barred (for example, is it knowing that a mark in question is in use or is it knowing that a trade mark application has been filed and\/or registered?)<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There is no statute of limitation for an injunction claim, as long as the infringing act continues.\u00a0 For a damages claim, the trademark owner must bring the claim within three years of becoming aware of the (i) infringing act and (ii) the identity of the infringer, or within ten years of the infringing act, regardless of knowledge, whichever is sooner.\u00a0 Knowing that a trademark application has been filed or registered is not sufficient to trigger the three-year period.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your jurisdiction does the law protect unregistered trademarks of any kind, including by way of passing off, unfair competition or protection of trade dress. What are the criteria for their subsistence?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Unfair Competition Prevention Act in Korea enumerates various types of unfair competition: traditional unfair competition, dilution and imitation of a product shape.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Traditional unfair competition consists of the following elements:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>(1)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The plaintiff\u2019s product (business)-identifier must be widely recognized among the consumers in the related industry in Korea;<\/p>\n<p>(2)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The defendant must use a product-identifier that is identical or similar to that of the plaintiff; and<\/p>\n<p>(3)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 There must be likelihood of confusion as a result.<\/p>\n<p>Regarding the widely recognized status, the Supreme Court ruled that it is sufficient to be known to traders or consumers within a certain region of Korea rather than across the whole of Korea.\u00a0 Depending on the context of the case, \u201cconsumer\u201d could mean \u201crelevant consumers\u201d only, or interpreted to include \u201cconsumers of unrelated goods,\u201d namely, \u201cirrelevant consumers.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Dilution consists of the following elements:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>(1)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The plaintiff\u2019s product (business)-identifier must be widely recognized among the general public in Korea;<\/p>\n<p>(2)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The defendant must use a product-identifier that is identical or similar to that of the plaintiff; and<\/p>\n<p>(3)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 There must be a likelihood of harm caused to the distinctiveness or reputation of the plaintiff\u2019s product-identifier as a result.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWidely recognized\u201d under the dilution provision requires a higher level of fame and means \u201cknown to most of the general public.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Imitation of a product shape<\/strong> occurs when one imitates shape of another\u2019s product within three (3) years from the date on which it is first formed.\u00a0 This unfair competition provision essentially functions to protect \u201cunregistered\u201d designs.\u00a0 However, this unfair competition provision is inapplicable to cases if the shape of another\u2019s product is commonly used for products of the same kind.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your jurisdiction will the Court hear claims for registered trademark infringement in parallel with claims for passing off,unfair competition, infringement of trade dress or other misleading advertising, or does a claimant need to bring such claims in a separate cause of action?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, courts in South Korea will hear multiple claims in the same case as long as the claims asserted are based on the same set of facts.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your jurisdiction, do your Courts share jurisdiction with your Trade Mark Office, such that parties need to seek to seize the forum they prefer first in time, or does the Court take precedence and intervene to stay or transfer any live Registry proceedings (for example relating to invalidity or revocation of registered trade mark) which may overlap with an issued infringement claim and related counterclaim?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, courts in South Korea do not share jurisdiction with the trademark office.\u00a0 Further, courts in South Korea does not decide on or intervene in registry proceedings, even if they overlap with an infringement claim or a related counterclaim.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Where the defendant has a counterclaim for invalidity or cancellation of the registered trademark being asserted against it (either on the basis of earlier rights or as a result of non-use by the trademark proprietor), does the counterclaim become part of the infringement action, so that both issues are heard by the same Court within a single action, with the Court making a determination at its conclusion, or are the validity issues bifurcated and heard in separate parallel proceedings? If in your jurisdiction validity issues are bifurcated, what are the practical consequences of this from a timing perspective? For example, does this mean that a Court will stay the infringement claim and proceed with the validity attack first to avoid finding a trademark infringed, only to have a separate Court find the trademark invalid at a later date?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, invalidity and cancellation actions are never heard by civil courts, but by the Intellectual Property Tribunal (\u201cIPT\u201d) which is the administrative body with the Ministry of Intellectual Property. Even if a trademark&#8217;s invalidity has not yet been finalized, the Court may dismiss the trademark owner&#8217;s claim as an\u00a0<strong>&#8220;abuse of rights&#8221;<\/strong>\u00a0if it determines that there are\u00a0clear grounds for invalidity. In other words, the court can conclude the infringement action first without waiting for the results of the invalidation action.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your jurisdiction, does a defendant have a defence of using a mark honestly and concurrently available to them?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Korea does not recognize a doctrine equivalent to the \u201chonest concurrent use\u201d defence found in some common law jurisdictions.\u00a0 Therefore, a defendant cannot avoid liability for trademark infringement simply by showing that it used a mark honestly while another mark was used concurrently.<\/p>\n<p>However, the prior user who used a mark prior to the filing date of the registered mark may continue using the mark within the same scope of business, provided that (i) the prior user began using the trademark in Korea before the trademark application was filed and continuously used the trademark in Korea after that point, (ii) at the time of the trademark application, the prior user\u2019s mark was recognized by Korean consumers as a mark indicating the goods of a certain entity, and (iii) the prior user had no intent to use goodwill associated with another\u2019s mark to gain improper financial profit.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">When considering the validity of a registered trade mark, does the Court consider whether the trade mark has been registered in bad faith? If so, what actions would indicate this bad faith?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, Korean courts consider whether a trademark has been registered in bad faith when determining its validity. \u00a0Bad faith may be inferred from circumstances such as knowledge of another party\u2019s mark, imitation of a well-known mark, filings by former distributors or business partners, trademark squatting, or attempts to exploit the goodwill of another\u2019s brand.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">If the main objective in commencing infringement proceedings is to secure an injunction, is a claimant required to state how much their claim is worth at the point their claim is issued?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, the value of the claim must be stated even in an infringement proceeding for an injunction only.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is it possible to seek a preliminary injunction in your jurisdiction? If so, what is the criteria a trademark owner needs to establish and is there a bond or other undertaking in damages payable to compensate the defendant if the Court finds no infringement following a substantive hearing?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes. To obtain a preliminary injunction, the plaintiff must show (i) a strong cause of action for formal action, and (ii) necessity of urgent relief. The plaintiff\u2019s necessity of urgent relief is generally recognized by the court if there is an act of infringement. However, if there are any evidentiary materials illustrating the seriousness of the infringement, then the court would recognize necessity of urgent relief more easily.<\/p>\n<p>The plaintiff may be required to provide security for litigation costs upon the defendant\u2019s petition. If the plaintiff is a foreign company, then the defendant can file a petition with the court, requesting that the plaintiff provide security for litigation costs, before filing their Answer on the merits of the case. Payment of the security for litigation costs can be made in cash or in security bond.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is a licensee (whether exclusive or non-exclusive) of a registered trademark entitled to commence proceedings for trademark infringement? Does the trademark proprietor need to be joined as a party to the proceedings, and does it have an effect whether the licensee is registered before the local Trademark Registry?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>An exclusive licensee recorded as such on the trademark register is entitled to commence proceedings for trademark infringement, and the trademark owner need not be joined as a party to the proceedings. A non-exclusive licensee is unable to commence such proceedings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Where the claim for trademark infringement is premised on similarity between the defendant\u2019s mark and the trademark owner\u2019s registered mark, does the proprietor need to demonstrate that confusion has occurred or simply that there is a risk of confusion? What is the minimum standard required to secure a finding of infringement?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Likelihood of confusion as to the source is not stipulated as a separate requirement under Trademark Act.\u00a0 According to Supreme Court precedents, similarity between trademarks must be determined based on whether there is a likelihood of confusion by examining the compared marks in terms of their appearance, pronunciation, and meaning objectively, in their entireties, and at different time and place.\u00a0 In addition, similarity of the compared marks should be determined, not by juxtaposing them side by side, but from the perspective of general consumers who would look at the compared marks at a different time and place.\u00a0 If there is a likelihood of confusion when collectively taking into account the impression, memory, association emanated by the two compared marks to general consumers, then the two marks would be considered similar to each other.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your jurisdiction is it possible to rely on post-sale confusion as a means of securing a finding of trade mark infringement?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>A similar theory exists in Korea where confusion as to the source in trademark infringement should be determined from the perspective of the general consumer, like a third party, that sees the product carried by the consumer, not from the perspective of the purchaser of the product. This theory does not necessarily require sale or purchase.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your jurisdiction what type of disclosure or discovery is typically ordered by the Court in respect of trademark infringement actions from both parties?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Korea does not have broad discovery or disclosure procedures comparable to those in common law jurisdictions. Instead, evidence is primarily submitted by the parties themselves, and courts may order the production of specific evidence in limited circumstances under the Civil Procedure Act (Korea).<\/p>\n<p>The discovery rules in South Korea are limited, and relies on each party to submit evidence supporting its case. There is no broad discovery and though the court can order production of evidence, such an order must specify the exact document and is at the judge\u2019s discretion.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What type of expert evidence is permitted by the Court in your jurisdiction? Does the Court accept consumer surveys and are there specific rules about how consumer surveys are conducted. Do the parties need to request prior permission from the Court to adduce survey evidence?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Korean courts may accept expert evidence, including expert reports and consumer surveys. Consumer surveys are often used in cases involving likelihood of confusion or recognition of a well-known mark. Although there are no specific statutory rules governing surveys, courts examine their reliability and methodology when assessing evidentiary weight. Prior permission from the court is not required for a party to submit survey evidence.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does evidence submitted by your client in trademark infringement proceedings have to be accompanied with a statement of truth or other similar declaration?  Which party is typically responsible for signing the statement of truth (or similar), the entity itself or the entity's representatives?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, there is no requirement for submission of a statement of truth or a similar declaration in South Korea.\u00a0 However, affidavits and witness statements submitted as evidence are typically notarized.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your jurisdiction is it possible for a claimant to seek summary judgment and\/or strike out of an infringement claim? What are the legal criteria for a Court to grant summary judgment?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Korean civil procedure does not provide for summary judgment or strike-out mechanisms comparable to those in common law jurisdictions. However, if a defendant\u00a0<strong>fails to submit a written defense<\/strong>\u00a0or if they\u00a0<strong>admit to all of the plaintiff&#8217;s claims<\/strong>\u00a0(confession), the court may render a judgment quickly without holding a hearing or ordering additional evidence.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How long does it typically take to reach judgment in a trademark infringement action from issue of the claim, through to first instance decision? What is the lower and upper range of legal costs for such an action?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>It typically around 6-12 months from filing of a complaint to first instance decision.\u00a0 The timeline largely depends on the complexity of the case and how aggressively the defendant defends itself, which would impact on the number of hearings held and the number exchanges of briefs between the parties.\u00a0 The legal costs could range from approximately 5,000 USD for a straightforward case with little to no defence from the defendant, to 100,000 USD or more to a complicated case with many legal claims involving a defendant that defends their case vigorously.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Following a first instance decision, is it possible for either party to appeal the decision? What are the grounds upon which an appeal can be lodged? Is it necessary to request permission to appeal, or are appeals automatically permissible? If either party file an appeal, is the enforcement of the first instance decision stayed pending the outcome of the appeal?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Following a first instance decision, the losing party is entitled to appeal the decision.\u00a0 Upon appeal, the enforcement of the first instance decision is stayed pending the outcome of the appeal.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">If the parties have been involved in a dispute before the local Trademark Office, what relevance does this have on later infringement proceedings? For example where trademark owner (A) may have already sought to oppose the registration of a third party (B\u2019s) mark in proceedings before the local Trade Mark Office, is the trademark owner estopped from seeking invalidity of a registered trade mark where its opposition failed where the invalidity action is based on the same grounds as the unsuccessful opposition?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The outcome in an opposition action does not preclude later actions concerning the validity of the mark.\u00a0 In the above example, trademark owner A may file an invalidation action against third party B\u2019s mark based on the same grounds as the unsuccessful opposition.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In your jurisdiction, does the Court consider both liability and quantum within the same proceeding, or will any damages be assessed after the Court has reached a decision on liability? How are damages for trademark infringement proceedings typically assessed in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In Korea, liability and damages are typically determined within the same infringement proceeding. The Trademark Act provides several methods for assessing damages, including the infringer\u2019s profits, the trademark owner\u2019s lost profits, and a reasonable royalty. Statutory damages may also be available where actual damages are difficult to prove.<\/p>\n<p>In practice, courts most often calculate damages based on the infringer\u2019s profits in infringement cases. However, the financial information necessary to calculate such damages is controlled by the infringer and is often not be fully disclosed. As a result, courts often rely on limited available evidence and exercise their discretion in estimating damages, which often results in relatively modest awards compared with some other jurisdictions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In addition to an injunction and damages, what other remedies are available in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In a civil case, in addition to an injunction and damages, a trademark owner may also seek corrective measures to restore its reputation, such as a publication of apology or publication of the decision.<\/p>\n<p>Trademark infringement is punishable under the Criminal Act, and an infringement may be liable for up to seven years of imprisonment or file of up to 100 million KRW including confiscation of the infringing goods.<\/p>\n<p>Also, administrative actions are possible such as border control measures and raids.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Following a decision on the merits, is the winner entitled to recover all or a portion of its legal costs incurred in bringing or defending the proceedings. If legal costs are recoverable, what is the procedure involved and how does the Court assess the level of legal costs which should be reimbursed by the losing party.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Following a favourable decision, the winner is entitled to recover a portion of its legal costs.\u00a0 The actual amount is calculated based on the Rules of the Supreme Court which take into consideration factors such as the claim value, stage of proceedings, whether there was an appeal, etc., not the actual costs incurred by the winning party. \u00a0The actual portion of the legal costs that are recordable are calculated by the court clerk and included in the written decision.\u00a0 The legal costs are generally much lower than the legal fees that have \u201cactually\u201d been paid or are expected to be incurred in the future.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Once the Court has issued a judgment, how long typically does the losing party have to comply with the Court\u2019s judgment including any final injunction issued? What are the consequences for failing to comply and how would the winning party seek enforcement of its judgement.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>A judgment becomes confirmed as final and conclusive when the appeal period expires \u2013 generally two weeks after the service of the judgment.\u00a0 The losing party must comply immediately once the decision becomes confirmed as final and conclusive.\u00a0 In case of failure to comply in time, the court will impose a monetary penalty for each day of non-compliance or a fixed amount per violation, and the winning party may file an order for execution of the judgment with the court.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\r\n<div class=\"word-count-hidden\" style=\"display:none;\">Estimated word count: <span class=\"word-count\">3592<\/span><\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<\/ol>\r\n\r\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"\/wp-content\/themes\/twentyseventeen\/src\/jquery\/components\/filter-guides.js\" async><\/script><\/div>"}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide\/138636","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/comparative_guide"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=138636"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}