Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

South Korea: Patenting a food-related invention in Korea

Sponsored by


Many food products contain known ingredients, rather than novel ingredients, as essential components. Such food products are usually a result of combining components in a special ratio to achieve a particular flavour, taste, effect, etc.

Claim format

Inventions for food products are commonly drafted as method or composition claims to secure a patent in Korea. For example, a method of enhancing the flavour of a food product by uniformly mixing substance A with sodium glutamate, and a food composition for lowering blood glucose level comprising substance A as an active ingredient.

Natural products per se are not patentable because they are already known in the art and thus lack novelty. However, if one natural product shows a unique function or effect, a "use invention" for the natural product may be permitted as a patent as long as it satisfies the patentability requirements.

When one drafts a patent specification and claims for food-related inventions, the following should be kept in mind.

Description in the specification and claims

In the specification, it is necessary to describe (i) the sensory effects of the food (i.e. appearance, taste, smell, texture, etc.), and/or (ii) functional effects of the food.

The sensory effects must be objectively and scientifically demonstrated using chemical or mechanical analysis (e.g. electronic nose, electronic tongue, and texture profile analyser), a systematic sensory test, etc. Trained panels can be used for sensory testing to determine people's food preference.

In the case of functional foods, experimental data verifying the effectiveness or utility should be disclosed in the specification originally filed, in a similar way to medical use inventions. Such data can be obtained from in vitro, animal, or human tests, or a method using a biomarker. Unlike medical use inventions, qualitative analysis or sensory test results for food products are acceptable to the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO).

Claims for functional foods are usually written in the form of "a food composition for improving or preventing…", and are not allowed to use the expression "treatment" or "treating", which indicates medical utility. The use of a food composition is required for the object achieved by the property of functional components, such as lowering blood glucose level, improving obesity, and improving hyperlipidemia.

Overall, it seems that a lower standard for the specification and claims is applied to food-related inventions than for medical use inventions.

Trends in patent application filing for food-related inventions for the last 10 years in Korea


Safety aspect

As food is ingested, safety to the human body should not be overlooked. In a case in which it is not obvious to a person skilled in the art whether materials or components constituting a food composition are safe for human consumption, the composition claim is rejected as an invention likely to cause harm to public health under Article 32 of the Korean Patent Act. According to KIPO's Examination Guidelines (a) materials obtained from a human body (e.g. placenta and blood) and (b) substances toxic or harmful to the human body (e.g. DDT and Hg) are not permitted for use in the preparation of food. When the KIPO raises a rejection on the ground that the safety of components of a food composition is unknown, the rejection can be resolved by submitting a test result to prove human safety.

Patent application filings for food-related inventions are continuously increasing in Korea, as shown in the graph above. We believe that careful preparation of the specification and claims raises the chance of securing a patent for food-related inventions.

Min Son

Partner, Hanol IP & Law


HANOL Intellectual Property & Law

6th Floor, Daemyung Tower, 135, Beobwon-ro, Songpa-gu

Seoul, 05836

Republic of Korea

Tel: +82 2 942 1100 

Fax: +82 2 942 2600

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

12th annual awards announces winners
Sources say parties in trademark cases could tussle over the meaning of source identifier and whether surveys are fair, following the US Supreme Court ruling
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
In-house sources say the UPC’s determinations on validity, injunctions, and damages could dictate whether companies leave their patents in or out
Business is quiet so far but the UPC has everything it needs to attract patentees, panellists at Managing IP’s IP & Innovation Summit argued yesterday, June 7
Reviewing the list of automatically qualifying degrees every three years is a great idea and should bring more tech-savvy people to the bar
A Foss Patents blog post revealed that Mr Justice Marcus Smith handed down his judgment in Optis v Apple on May 10
Witnesses during a committee hearing criticised proposals to increase some fees by as much as 400%
Sources say they are likely to hire external counsel that can create a lasting first impression but might turn their backs on lawyers who have nothing new to offer
Varuni Paranavitane, of counsel at Finnegan, examines recent decisions by US and UK courts to demonstrate the proof of infringement that was required