Amended rules in Korea regarding inventorship

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Cookies Settings

Amended rules in Korea regarding inventorship

Sponsored by

25LeeInternationalSouthKorea.png

Lee International speaks about the Korean inventorship rules

Recently, two significant amendments related to inventorship have been made to the Enforcement Rules of the Korean Patent Act, which are essential for those seeking to file a patent in Korea. These amendments aim to improve the previous administrative practice of managing inventor information by formally collecting and utilizing it as industrial property data, thereby strengthening the country’s industrial competitiveness.

1. Improvement of the Inventorship Correction Procedure

In the past, there were cases where individuals without actual inventive contribution were added as inventors after the issuance of the notice of allowance. To prevent such misuse, the amendment now partially limits the timeframe for correcting inventorship, which was previously unrestricted. Additionally, documents that were once required only after patent registration must now also be submitted during prosecution.

According to the amended rules, patent applicants are no longer permitted to add inventors between the notice of allowance (NOA) and the patent registration. During this period, only limited corrections are allowed, such as correcting typographical errors, updating addresses, or changing names and transliterations, provided the listed inventors remain unchanged. However, inventorship can still be corrected from the time of filing until the issuance of the NOA, as well as after patent registration, as before.

Previously, a simple statement of reasons was sufficient to correct inventors during the prosecution of the patent application. Under the amended rules, however, supporting documents verifying the inventor’s identity are now required, including: i) a statement explaining the reasons for the correction, and ii) a declaration signed or sealed by both the patent applicant and all inventors involved in correction.

These new requirements apply to any inventorship correction documents submitted on or after November 1, 2024.

2. Requirement of Inventor Identification Information in Patent Applications

To systematically manage and utilize industrial property information collected and generated by the Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), the Act on the Management and Utilization of Industrial Property Information was enacted and has been in effect since August 7, 2024. This Act grants the Commissioner the authority to collect, process, and utilize publicly available industrial property information, as well as provide the processed data to support the effective planning and implementation of research and development initiatives and technology/industry-related strategies. Additionally, to safeguard technologies crucial to national security or significant national interests, the Act authorizes the Commissioner to use pending industrial property information or share it with relevant national administrative agencies when deemed necessary.

In line with this, the amended rules require patent applications to specify the citizenship of each inventor. However, submission of supporting documents, such as citizenship certificates, is not necessary.

These changes have been applied to all patent applications filed on or after November 1, 2024. Additionally, specifying the citizenship of each inventor is mandatory for both new applications and divisional applications.

3. Summary

The amend rules to introduce changes to inventorship correction procedure and inventor Identification information requirements at the time of filing, are summarized in the table below.

 

 

Before November 1, 2024

From November 1, 2024

Correction to

Inventorship

After filing and until a notice of allowance (NOA) is issued

- Permissible

- No supporting evidence required

- Permissible

- Declaration signed by the applicant and the inventors involved in the correction required

After issuance of a NOA and until patent registration

- Permissible

- No supporting evidence required

- Limited

- Correction is possible only in cases where the inventor’s identity remains unchanged (e.g., minor typographical error, name changes, transliteration difference, etc.)

After patent registration

- Permissible

- Declaration signed by the applicant and all inventors involved in the correction required

Same as the current requirement

Citizenship of each inventor

when filing a new patent

application or divisional

application

Not required

Required

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Armstrong Teasdale’s Jim Heinen Jr discusses the challenge of balancing billables, business development and family life and explains why not all patent lawyers are science nerds
From cross-border jurisdiction to the end of the transitional period, Powell Gilbert’s Ioana Sabau and Bryce Matthewson predict the biggest talking points ahead
A wave of office launches and lateral hires reflect the draw of patent disputes, but booming AI, semiconductor and data centre markets are offering an even bigger IP opportunity
The hire of Frederick Nicolle as a partner continues Pinsent Masons' expansion while reducing Simmons’ patent prosecution offering in London to zero
The expansion into Granada forms part of a national ‘decentralisation’ strategy focused on providing proximity to research and tech businesses away from traditional hubs
Three successive wins have got the firm eyeing additional opportunities as ITC work booms
While many firms remain focused on generative AI, recent hires and practice launches suggest the next battle may be for lawyers who understand how AI is moving into the physical world
The explosion of data centres has prompted patent pool operators to create new licensing opportunities
The court struck out copyright claims brought by Ladbrokes owner Entain, saying that ownership details should have been completed before litigation began
Düsseldorf has overtaken Munich as the UPC's busiest division, while firms including Winston Taylor, Clifford Chance, and Hoyng Rokh Monegier featured in disputes involving Abbott, Essity, Amazon and Hurom
Gift this article