WTO 협정과 국내법 -한,일간 PDP 특허 관련 무역분쟁의 시사점-

Abstract

A series of disputes arose between Korea and Japan, which involved patent

infringement claims for PDP products. In the first dispute between Samsung and

Fujitsu, the Customs Office of Japan suspended liquidation of Samsung's

imported PDP products into the Japanese market. In return, in the second dispute

between LG and Matsushita, the Korean Trade Commission (KTC) granted a

provisional measure which enabled the Customs Office of Korea to suspend

liquidation of Matsushita's PDP products into the Korean market. Although both

disputes were resolved as a result of settlements, these disputes triggered an

important issue of whether suspensions of liquidations in both cases are

inconsistent with Part III, Sections 3 & 4 of the TRIPS Agreement. This paper

analyzes this.

This paper demonstrates that the Customs Tariff Law of Japan is inconsistent

with Article 53 of the TRIPS Agreement in terms of its time limit for release of

suspension which is established under Article 21-5 of the Customs Tariff Law of

Japan. In consequence, suspension of liquidation by the Customs Office of Japan

is also inconsistent with the same article under the TRIPS Agreement. It appears

that the same measure is in violation of national treatment obligations under the

TRIPS and GATT Agreements.

On the other hand, this paper shows why and how the KTCs provisional

measure and its related measure, suspension of liquidation by the Korean

Customs Office, can be consistent with relevant provisions of the TRIPS

Agreement. The author also argues that the conformity with the TRIPS...