Assemblyman Kim Jeong-ho Criticizes Ministry of Industry's Opposition to 'Korean-Style Evidence Collection System' for SME Protection

Democratic Party of Korea National Assembly Member Kim Jeong-ho (Gimhae Eul)

[Asia Economy Yeongnam Reporting Headquarters Reporter Lee Sang-hyun] Kim Jeong-ho, a member of the National Assembly’s Industry, Trade, Energy, Small and Medium Enterprises Committee (Democratic Party, Gimhae Eul), criticized the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy for opposing the 'Korean-style Evidence Collection System.'

Rep. Kim argued that the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, which should support the competitiveness of domestic companies and the overall growth of the industrial sector, is opposing a system designed to prevent large corporations from stealing technology from small and medium-sized enterprises.

The 'Korean-style Evidence Collection System' is a system being promoted by the Korean Intellectual Property Office to address the disadvantage victims face in patent lawsuits, as most evidence regarding patent infringement and damages is held by the infringer, making it difficult to secure such evidence.

A similar example is the Discovery system operated in the United States.

The Korean Intellectual Property Office anticipates that intellectual property disputes will intensify alongside the escalating global technology hegemony competition. Based on the opinion that there is a need to establish a litigation system that meets international standards to enhance the patent competitiveness of Korean companies, the office has been promoting the introduction of this system since 2019.

The recent LG-SK lawsuit in the United States is a representative case demonstrating the necessity of this system, as it was a patent dispute between domestic companies but lacked a system in Korea to provide evidence, leading to reliance on the U.S. litigation system.

In the National Assembly, Rep. Kim proposed a revision to the Patent Act in August 2020, incorporating the Korean-style Evidence Collection System.

Despite numerous discussions, including bill proposals and public hearings, and considerable time passing, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy had not expressed any particular opinion. However, when the bill was submitted as an agenda item at the Industry Committee’s bill subcommittee in September, the ministry expressed opposition.

The ministry’s view is that expert fact-finding investigations could cause significant damage, necessitating legal safeguards. However, the Korean Intellectual Property Office insists on a full review of the system, stating that the demands from the semiconductor industry, which seek to undermine the system’s purpose, make acceptance difficult.

Rep. Kim said, "It is time to eradicate the chronic issue of large corporations stealing technology from small and medium enterprises and unauthorized use of patented technology," adding, "Because it is inherently very difficult to secure evidence proving infringement due to the nature of patents, the introduction of a fundamentally improved Korean-style Evidence Collection System is absolutely necessary."

Meanwhile, according to data investigated by the Korean Intellectual Property Office, a survey of 80 companies regarding the actual evidence collection system showed 61 in favor, 12 neutral, and 7 opposed, confirming that most associations and companies support the system.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.