1. MOIP distributes a guideline for filing an application for a design created by using AI.
-The guideline provides basic principles and step-by-step notes regarding the registrability of a design using AI.
MOIP announced the distribution of a guideline for filing an application for a design created by using AI so that an applicant, who wants to file an application for a design created by using AI, can refer to.
This guideline has been prepared focusing on whether a design created by using AI is registrable and the matters to be noted by an applicant in the stages of creating a design, filing an application for it and examining it, by comprehensively considering the trends in major countries and opinions from the design field. The major points are as follows:
<(1) Even though a design is created by using AI, if it meets the registration requirements, it can be registered.>
Even though a design is created by using AI, if it meets the registration requirements, such as novelty, ease of creation, industrial applicability, etc., according to the Korean Design Protection Act, it can be registered. But, in the case where the fact that a design is created by AI is described in the description of a design, it requires a substantial contribution from the human described as the creator.
For example, if the output is improved by inputting specific directives that affect the dominant aesthetic sense of a design, such as shape, proportion, composition, color, etc. of the design, the substantial contribution from a human is recognized. However, if an application for the output generated by AI is filed, without any modification, reconstruction, edit, or supplementation, by inputting only a comprehensive and simple directive, such as “make a chair design”, it is difficult to recognize the human’s substantial contribution.
<(2) In the stage of creating a design, it needs to manage input information security, to record and store the creative process, and to check prior designs.>
If a design draft and a product image, etc., which are input in the process of using AI, are utilized as learning information of AI service and are made public, since the novelty of the design may be lost, it needs to be careful with the security management.
Additionally, in preparation for the case where it needs to prove the qualification of a creator or the substantial contribution of a human, it is preferable to record and keep the materials related to the creative process, such as the intent of creation, the model of AI used, prompt log records, and selection, modification and reconstruction processes, etc.
Further, since AI can generate an output which has been previously published, is identical with or similar to designs filed in applications or registered, it needs to check if there are any identical or similar designs by conducting prior design searches before filing a design application.
<(3) In the stage of filing an application for a design, care needs to be taken about the description of an applicant and whether drawings are proper for the application.>
In the [Creator] field of a design application, only a natural person should be described, in the [Applicant] filed, a natural person or corporation should be described, and the name of the AI model should not be described. However, regarding the case that a person is described as the creator without any substantial contribution and the design is registered, if the fact is later discovered, the relevant design may be invalidated.
Since AI-generated images may include perspective, lighting, background elements, etc. or may be inconsistent in terms of shapes and proportions between drawings, it needs to modify or change the lines, surfaces, proportions, and compositions, etc. to fit the drawings appropriate for the application, instead of submitting them as they are.
<(4) In the process of examination of a design, it needs to be comprehensively determined by considering the human’s substantial contribution, the consistency of drawings, the novelty, etc.>
When it is doubtful, in the examination stage, whether the substantial contribution of a human is made in the creation of a design to be filed, an examiner may request evidence, such as records of the creation process, and the confirmation of the creator(s), etc., to be submitted. If the applicant cannot prove the human’s substantial contribution, the relevant design can be rejected.
In addition, when the design filed in the application is inconsistent in the entire shape or proportions among the drawings, it can be considered as not meeting the requirements for ‘industrial applicability’. When the draft of the design created by using AI is publicly disclosed, the design can be rejected due to the lack of novelty.
2. MOIP prevents misleading indications of origin by securing rights for local resources.
-A program is recruited to support ‘the protection of intellectual property (IP) of local resources’ to secure rights for local resources (~July 21, 2026).
-It is expected to prevent comprehensive disputes from domestic trademark disputes to unauthorized overseas trademark preoccupations.
# In 2001, a Korea company “A”, which tried to sell Sunchang Gochujang in the US market, finally won a lawsuit against a foreign company, which registered the trademark of Sunchang Gochujang locally. However, “A” had to pay about 4 years and 2 million US Dollars as litigation costs.
# Hoengseong Hanwoo (Korean beef), which is a representative Korean specialty, was also registered as a trademark, without permission, in China by a Chinese broker. Korean beef farmers, which were trying to enter the local market, were requested to pay 10 million Korea Won as a condition for transferring their rights by brokers.
According to MOIP, a ‘program to support the protection of IP of local resources’ was prepared to prevent misleading indications of domestic and international origins of local resources and it was open for applications by July 21, 2026.
When the local resources, such as Jeju tangerines, Ulleungmul thistle, etc., which are resources representing the regions’ historical, cultural and geographical characteristics, are used in the other regions or overseas, without permissions, the values of local resources can be damaged or lead to economic damages. In addition, while the status of K-brands rises by the Korean Wave, the number of cases of occupying Korea local resource trademarks, without permission, has increased. The core of this program is to help local cooperative corporation focus on economic activities, to avoid future disputes, by comprehensively supporting the rights both domestically and internationally by analyzing the geographical characteristics of local resources and their causal relationship with the regions.
Also, as part of proactive administration, the local governments will take the lead to lay the foundation to manage the origins and qualities, etc. of local resources. In this point, it is expected to reduce the local cooperatives’ trademark management burdens.
Specifically, this program will support ►securing domestic and international IP rights by reviewing the link between the geographical characteristics, such as natural and human elements and reputations of local resources, and ►the establishment of strategies to secure IP rights, which are proper for the trademark systems of major export countries (intended export countries) regarding the local resources holding existing Korean trademarks. Eligibility is for local governments which prove and manage the qualities, production methods and other characteristics of local resources.
3. MOIP has initiated patent analysis for 13 projects linked across R&D departments, such as AI development strategies, space convergence technology developments, and blockbuster pharmaceutical market strategies, etc.
MOIP will promote a ‘2026 patent bigdata-based industrial innovation support project’ (hereinafter, referred to as the ‘industrial innovation support project’), to secure technological competitiveness in future growth engine fields, such as AI, space and biotechnology, etc., and to support the establishment of national R&D strategies.
The industrial innovation support project is to diagnose the technology development trends and competition structures and to support the establishment of R&D strategies, by analyzing patent bigdata in the technology sectors, such as nationally important high-tech industries, etc. Customized patent analyses based on the demands from R&D departments and specialized institutions are provided to be used to establish R&D strategies and step-by-step implementation plans. This year, the project focuses on patent analysis to secure future growth engines, focusing on the fields, such as AI, space, bio-tech, etc., where international competition for technological supremacy is intensifying.
In the AI field, it analyzes patents related to the AI foundation model of Shared AI License Foundation (SAIL) participated by major US AI companies. Through this, it will identify a technology which may lead to technological subordination of the Republic of Korea and proactively find potential threat factors from various perspectives. It also plans to analyze technological competitiveness and core patent trends of major countries and companies across the supply chain in the field of physical AI technology and to derive promising technologies and R&D directions.
In the space field, patent analysis is conducted in the technology areas where the space industry is converged with the advanced technologies, such as robots, AI, semiconductors, etc. In addition, biopharmaceuticals and food development strategies in the space environment will be analyzed to present the core technologies and R&D directions which are needed in the future space economy era.
In the bio-tech field, key patent families of the international blockbuster drugs and GLP-1 obesity treatments, whose patents are scheduled to expire in the future, will be intensively analyzed. Through this, it plans to support domestic pharmaceutical and biotech companies in establishing biosimilar development strategies.
Further, patent analysis will be carried forward to strengthen the competitiveness of a major regional industry. Patent analyses will be conducted targeting the autonomous manufacturing robots in Daegu Metropolitan City, Software Defined Vehicle (SDV, software-focused vehicle)-based autonomous driving core components in Busan Metropolitan City, and renewable energy industries (floating solar power, RE100) in Jeonbuk Special Self-Governing Province, etc., thereby planning to support in establishing region-customized R&D strategies and fostering new industries.
4. MOIP published a ‘guideline to semiconductor fabrication equipment and components: front-end process.’
-The guideline provides the technology and patent examination information of semiconductor fab equipment and components at a glance.
-This guideline is written by examiners specialized in semiconductors, to support the establishment of high-quality examination and industrial patent strategies.
According to MOIP, the ‘guideline to semiconductor fabrication equipment and components: front-end process’ has been published to strengthen the expertise in semiconductor patent examination and the patent competitiveness in the relevant industry and digitally distributed through its website, etc.
The semiconductor fabrication process consists of a front-end process and a back-end process. The guideline focuses on the following key 8 unit processes of the semiconductor front-end processes: ►cleaning, ►diffusion, ►chemical vapor deposition (CVD), ►physical vapor deposition (PVD), ►chemical mechanical planarization (CMP), ►photo, ►etching, and ►ion implantation (IMP). The major fab equipment and core components used for each process are systematically organized to be easily understood.
The guideline is written by professional semiconductor examiners with extensive practical experience (average more than 28 years) in the private sectors, by combining the technical expertise of the relevant industrial sites and the examination methods accumulated during the patent examination processes. The guideline is characterized by including the major equipment’s and components’ shapes (pictures), functions, cooperative patent classification (CPC, F-term), the important notes for examination, and the major domestic and international related companies, so as to be directly used in conducting examination and establishing patent strategies.
The director of the semiconductor examination bureau of MOIP said, “as the miniaturization and advancement of the semiconductor process further accelerate, the technological competitiveness of the semiconductor fabrication equipment and core components is emerging as an important factor to determine the competitiveness of the national semiconductor industry…we expect that the guideline will contribute to improving the expertise of patent examiners and increasing the quality of examination and it will also be useful for R&D and patent strategy establishment of small and medium companies and mid-market companies.”
5. Examination of a trademark will be more rapidly and fairly conducted.
-Simplifying the approval process results in efficient and prompt examination.
-The amended ‘regulations on handling trademark examination affairs, etc. took effect on July 1, 2026.
According to MOIP, the amended regulations have simplified the approval process for trademark examination and ensured that an examiner who was in charge of an application will no longer re-examine the application revoked and sent back by Korea Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board, for fair examination.
To more efficiently and rapidly process a trademark examination, the range of decisions made directly by an experienced examiner becomes broader. Previously, an examiner had to review the reports by section chiefs or team leaders, regardless of the importance or difficulty of the matter. However, in the future, regarding matters with lower importance and difficulty, an experienced examiner is allowed to make his/her own judgement and directly handle them, by greatly reducing the approval steps. This is expected to reduce a delay in examination due to the accumulation of approvals and to increase an examiner’s self-esteem and responsibility since (s)he will take the lead in handling examination.
The amended regulations allow that the partial rejection system introduced in 2023 can be more efficiently operated. In the partial rejection system, the timing for lifting the hold on examination is specified to prevent the hold on examination of a trademark in a later-filed application from being excessively prolonged due to the identical or similar trademark in an earlier-filed application by others. Accordingly, if the designated goods for the trademark in the earlier-filed application are rejected and those are not identical with or similar to the designated goods for the trademark in the later-filed application, the reason for the hold is considered as being lifted on the date when the rejection decision is finalized.
The procedures to notify a preliminary rejection is greatly changed. Previously, even though an applicant does not submit a written argument, etc., if a reason(s) for rejection according to Korean Trademark Act, Article 38-1 is not solved, after the notice of preliminary rejection was sent again, the trademark was rejected and therefore it took a long time. However, the amended regulations delete the duplicate notification procedure of a preliminary rejection, which was sent again to inform thereof even though no response to the preliminary rejection notice was not filed, so that a rejection decision of the designated goods having a reason(s) for rejection can be quickly made and the designated goods having no reason(s) for rejection can be rapidly registered.
For a more fair examination, the amended regulations change the way of appointing an examiner for an application which was revoked and sent back by Korea Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board. Previously, the same examiner in charge of the corresponding application conducted re-examination of the application revoked and set back. However, from now, by reflecting, on the examination stage, the intent of ‘restriction on prior judicial involvement’, which is applied to trials and litigation procedures, the amended regulations state that a new examiner shall examine the case revoked and sent back, except for the examiner rejecting the case. As there are concerns that prejudice could be involved if the same examiner examined the same case again, having a new examiner be in charge of the case is expected to align with public legal sentiment and strengthen the fairness of examination.
For reference, the way of appointing examiners as for patent and utility model applications revoked and sent back has been changed on the same day to exclude the examiners who made rejection decisions.
6. A specialized investigative organization is fully operated to protect the national technology security to prevent the leakage of advanced technologies, such as semiconductors and AI, etc.
-Dedicated investigation division for the leakage of advanced technologies is separated and newly established, and the technology police force was increased to 61 officers.
On June 30, 2026, the specialized investigative organization was officially launched to prevent the leakage of advanced technologies, such as semiconductors and AI, etc. and to protect the national technology security.
On June 29, 2026 MOIP announced a ‘plan to expand and reorganize the response system to technology leakage and theft’ to respond to the leakage of advanced technologies, such as semiconductors, AI, etc. The key of this plan is to investigate the advanced technology leakage cases on a dedicated track by newly establishing a technology divulgence police division. Technology police force is increased from 27 to 61.
[Expansion of the response organization to technology crime…the technology police increased from 27 to 61 officials.]
The technology police of MOIP introduced the patent and trade secret investigative powers in 2019 and has positioned itself as a dedicated investigative organization for technology crimes having the top-level technical expertise since a dedicated organization (technology and design police division) was established in 2021. Notably, it prevented in advance more than 10 trillion Korea Won in damages, through the active investigations by arresting the overseas leakage criminals of the secondary battery national high-tech strategic technology (July 2025 and February 2026) and the semiconductor national core technology (January 2023) and the design copycats (March 2026, etc.
However, despite the advancement of technology leakage and theft crimes, since the handling of the cases was prolonged due to the limited workforce, the need to strengthen response capabilities has consistently raised. Upon MOIP’s work report in December 2025, President Jaemyung LEE also emphasized the seriousness of technology crimes and called for an increase in technology police personnel. This reorganization is a follow-up measure taken in line with these discussions.
Accordingly, 3 divisions of the intellectual property protection analysis division, technology divulgence police division, and intellectual property protection standards division are newly established in the Intellectual Property Protection and International Cooperation Bureau of MOIP, and 28 people are added. The number of the dedicated organizations to respond to technology crimes increased from previously 1 division to 4 divisions, and the number of technology police officers are significantly increased from 27 to 61 through staff reallocation and the appointment of special judicial officers.
[A dedicated organization and investigators intensively respond to advance technology (trade secret) leakage and theft.]
The previous structure where trade secrets, patents and designs were handled by the same investigation division is completely reorganized, so that the investigation of trade secrets, which are often linked to the national core technology and national high-tech strategic technology and difficult to prove, is separated and established to the dedicated division, ‘technology divulgence police division’, and 21 investigators are arranged to intensively respond to the advanced technology leakage and theft crimes.
Notably, for rapid determination and proof of the leakage and theft of advanced technologies, such as semiconductors, AI, etc., the expertise in each of the electrical, chemical and mechanical fields is to be strengthened, and those with experience in patent examinations and trials, doctors, lawyers and patent attorneys are to be actively arranged as investigators. An amendment to the Act on the persons performing the duties of judicial police officers and the scope of their duties is to be carried forward to allow to investigate the violation cases of national core and advanced strategic technologies beyond trade secrets, based on this expertise.
[Technology leakage and theft are blocked in advance by first identifying warning signs.]
Focusing on the national core and advanced strategic technologies, the intellectual property protection analysis division performs duties of preemptively detecting the high-risk areas of technology leakage (core technologies, institutions, etc.) through patent bigdata, and establishing policies, etc. to prevent technology leakage and theft through technology protection and economic security analysis.
A whistleblower reward program for reporting industrial spies is operated (with the Unfair Competition Prevention Act enforced in May 2026) and a public-private cooperation system is also activated to early detect warning signs through ongoing communication channels with companies, research institutes, etc. and to switch to planned and proactive investigations. Trade secret protection and security educations are also activated for small and medium companies and startup companies which are weak in security capabilities.
[Standards and institutional mechanisms are established to strengthen independent investigative capabilities and to protect human rights.]
The intellectual property protection standards division establishes an institutional foundation to secure the legality, fairness and accountability throughout the entire investigation process by systematically refining and subdividing the investigative guidelines and compulsory investigation standards. Through this, it plans to proactively respond to concerns over declining investigation quality and oversight gaps due to changes in the investigative command system between the prosecution and special judicial police.
In addition, an investigation review committee is newly established and operated so that compulsory investigations with significant concerns about the fundamental rights can be subject to external expert consultation. Human rights protection in investigation processes is strengthened by substantially guaranteeing the right to counsel, expanding mandatory video recording, and introducing a case progress notification system, etc. A plan is to actively cooperate with the National Police Agency in enhancing investigative guidelines, providing education and promoting mutual manpower exchange.
|
