자동변속기차량의 댐퍼클러치 직결역 확대에 따른 실내부밍 개선

민경재(Kyoung-Jae Min),강철우(Cheol-Woo Kang),정승균(Seung-Gyoon Jung) 대한기계학회 2006 대한기계학회 춘추학술대회 Vol.2006 No.6

For the purpose of enhancing the fuel economy in compact cars, it has been tried to expand the lock-up rpm of damper clutch in automatic transmission. But this way is likely to cause the interior booming noise accompanied by the body vibration. It is why lowering the engine rpm, where the damper starts to be locked up is, causes powertrain vibration increases due to the shortage of the engine power needed by the vehicle load.<br/> Therefore, in this study, the causes and paths of the booming noise and body vibration coming from expanding the lock-up rpm will be investigated. That is, the following questions will be examined.: How much the vibration of the powertrain increases, how the vibration of the powertrain transfers and thus, how and how much the interior booming noise increases.<br/> Specially, using RMA(Running Mode Analysis) method, the principal vibration path and the resonance of vehicle body will be investigated. Through investigation, this study will propose a few kinds of structural modifications and among those modifications the optimized modification will be adopted as the refinement of the booming noise and the body vibration.

유한요소법을 이용한 복합재 구조물의 3차원 경화 수치모사

민경재(Kyoung Jae Min),박훈철(Hoon Cheol Park),윤광준(Kwang Joon Yoon) 한국항공우주학회 2002 韓國航空宇宙學會誌 Vol.30 No.6

게임의 유형별 그리고 구성요소별 법률관계의 검토 - 특허법 및 저작권법을 중심으로 -

민경재(Min Kyoung Jae) 충북대학교 법학연구소 2016 과학기술과 법 Vol.7 No.1

This paper is dealing to all the games from analog to digital game as the subject matter of intellectual property law, then dividing games into Sports and Board games, and Digital game which is a new term for ‘Game Industry Promotion Act’, and examining the three kinds of games by both patent law and copyright law. Studies show that rules of play of the general sports and the old board game are not subject matter of copyright and patent because they are idea and have nothing to do with the laws of nature. Meanwhile, the tools used in the sports or the old board game can meet the requirements for copyright, they will be recognized as copyrighted works, but they will be difficult to obtain patents for a loss of novelty. However, recently, newly invented a board game case, if the rules and tools of the board game can meet patent and copyright requirements, they can be protected. The paper suggests that in the case of sports such as the synchronized swimming, rhythmic gymnastics or figure skating, the performance should be copyrighted works because of its high entertainment and artistic feature, and in the case of board game of Baduk(go), espicially the record of baduk also should be copyrighted works because of having creativity and doing expression of player’s mind. In the case of digital games, basically the official website should be reviewed whether or not it can meet the criteria for the determination of compilation work,. At this time, common in the case of the same business there is layout or pattern, the website having similar design can not be copyrighted works. When Scenario, music, background pictures and clips of the game can meet the requirements we have established for copyrighted works, individual can be protected as copyrighted works. Especially the characters in the digital games can be described as an expression with the creativity, it will be recognized copyrighted works separately. Although some rules and tools for existing sports and board game are common, if somebody are adding additional rules through computer program, the made computer program can be included the subject matter of patent, So this paper suggests finally that review of inventive step under the Patent Office should be more strictly.

진정상품의 병행수입에 관한 비교법적 연구

민경재(Min, Kyoung-Jae) 한국재산법학회 2012 재산법연구 Vol.28 No.4

우리의 삶에서 병행수입은 너무나 일상화된 사실행위임에 반하여 그에 대한 법률적 논의는 충분히 이루어지고 있지 않고 있다. 이에 본고는 지적재산권법의 주요한 법률인 저작권법, 상표법, 그리고 특허법에 있어서 병행수입 허용여부에 대하여 개별적으로 고찰하면서, 이를 주로 미국과 일본의 법률 및 사례들과 비교 검토하는 방법으로 분석하여 보았다. 그 결과, 우리나라의 지적재산권법은 병행수입에 대하여 명문의 규정을 두지 않고 관세청 고시에 의하여 이 문제를 해결해 나가고 있는데, 관세청 고시는 복잡하긴 하지만 상표품에 대해서 일정한 요건을 갖추고 있는 경우 병행수입을 허용하고, 이를 저작권법에도 준용한다고 규정하고 있다. 여기서 “일정한 요건”으로서의 주요한 기준은 ‘상표권자가 수출국과 수입국에서 동일인이거나 동일인 관계에 있어야 한다’는 것이다. 이러한 기준은 상표의 원래 기능이 상품의 출처를 분명히 하여 상표권자의 신용과 영업질서를 보호하려는 것이지 상표권자에게 국제적 시장에서의 독점을 인정하기 위한 것이 아니라는데 있을 것이다. 한편 우리의 병행수입 정책은 일본이나 미국과 주요한 차이점이 몇가지 존재한다. 먼저 병행수입품의 기준에 있어서 일본의 경우 ‘품질의 동일성’ 측면이 약화되어 있는 반면에 우리나라나 미국은 병행수입품의 품질이나 내용면에서 정규 제품과 동일하여야 진정상품으로 간주되는 엄격기준을 요구하고 있다. 즉 품질이 다르면 병행수입을 허용하지 않는 것을 원칙으로 하고 있다. 그러나 병행수입의 문제가 발생하는 대부분의 경우가 다국적 기업의 경우임에 비추어 볼 때, 다국적 기업은 자신의 세계적인 신용을 유지하기 위해 상품의 품질을 엄격히 관리하여야 하고, 때문에 병행수입품과 정규 수입품 간의 품질 차이는 허용된 범위 내의 차이로 보는 것이 타당하다고 생각한다. 그런 측면에서 일본의 방침이 좀 더 타당하다고 생각한다. 두 번째, 역수입의 경우 미국은 저작권법에서 역수입을 허용하고 있지만 상표법에서는 역수입을 허용하고 있지 않는, 서로 모순된 방침을 가지고 있다. 그러나 우리의 경우에는 관세청 고시에서 명문으로 역수입의 경우에 병행수입을 허용하는 것으로 하고 있는데 이는 타당하다고 생각된다. 마지막으로, 관세청고시에서 제외된 특허법과 관련하여서는 아드리아마이신 수입사건(81가합466판결) 및 학계의 전반적인 논의처럼 병행수입을 허용하고 있다고 보는 것이 타당하다고 생각된다. 이렇듯 우리의 병행수입에 대한 정책은 지적재산권의 개별법률에서 통일된 체계를 가지고 있지 못하다. 따라서 장기적으로는 고시와 같은 정책적 수단에 의하기 보다는 실정법에 이를 명문으로 규율하는 것이 타당하다고 보이고, 지적재산의 합리적 보호와 공익을 위해서 기존의 병행수입을 한정적으로 허용하고 있는 우리의 통상정책을, 병행수입제도를 적극적으로 허용하는 방식으로 지적재산권법 전반에 통일적 체계를 확립하는 것이 바람직하다고 생각된다. This study deals with the controversial issue of parallel imports referring to genuine products which are protected by intellectual property rights but are imported without express authorization from the owners of the intellectual property rights. The theory of exhaustion is usually recognized within national borders but there is no consensus on this matter for genuine goods that cross borders, so it is possible for parallel imports to infringe on rights in the importing country, depending on the local legal framework. However, the position of Republic of Korea on exhaustion theory in Intellectual Property Law is unclear. Korea's Intellectual Property Law except Copyright Act contains nothing that directly addresses the issue. So parallel imports in Korea have been mainly regulated by the Customs Service and Fair Trade Commission. Therefore, this article looks at not only each law in intellectual property law and notices of the Custom Service and Fair Trade Commission in Korea but also other countries' system of parallel imports. As the result, the comparative study finds three main features between Korea and other countries such as U.S.A. and Japan. First, even though basically every country has similar criteria for allowing parallel imports, their views on the relationship between the two criteria differ slightly. Every country similarly requires two criteria for allowing parallel imports: that the right holders must be the same in both exporting and importing countries, and that the original goods and the parallel imported product must be identical in quality and product specification. However, while in Korea and U.S.A., the quality of the original goods and parallel imported goods must be strictly identical, the Japanese position is that the original seller is in a position to monitor and control the quality of the goods being sold abroad, therefore, the interpretation is that if the right holders are the same, any difference in quality between the original goods and the parallel imported goods must be within the tolerance limit of the original seller. In my opinion, Japanese approach seems to be more reasonable. The second feature is about re-imports. In Korea, re-imports as a kind of parallel imports is always possible by a notice of the Customs Service but in U.S.A., the result becomes differently whether or not the law is Trade Act or Copyright Act. In this case, I think, Korean approach is proper. Third, every country doesn't have a consistent policy on parallel imports. The better system of exhaustion or parallel imports is not easy to identify. If the purpose of intellectual property rights is to protect the interests of rights holders like inventors and concomitantly disseminate new technology and information to society, then a system based on national exhaustion is more appropriate. If, otherwise, a system based on international exhaustion will be more appropriate. The current system is unsustainable for an indefinite period of time. Both policy makers and rule makers should not hesitate any more. There is no reason why the haphazard laws in intellectual property law regarding parallel imports should be any different.

DVD 지역코드 우회기술의 기술적 보호조치의 면책범위 포함에 관한 연구

민경재(MIN, Kyoung jae) 한국소비자원 2012 消費者問題硏究 Vol.- No.43

JEC WORLD 2023 참관기

민경재(Kyoung-Jae Min),송범근(Bhum-Keun Song),김지혜(Ji-Hwe Kim),박다솜(Da-Som Park) 한국콘크리트학회 2023 콘크리트학회지 Vol.35 No.4