A trade secret protection reward of up to two hundred million won: what does the May 2026 amendment to the Enforcement Decree of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act set up?

What changed

Article 3-9 of the Enforcement Decree, newly inserted, sets the maximum reward under Article 16(2) of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act at two hundred million won. A person seeking that reward must apply to the Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office. On receiving an application, the Commissioner verifies its content, decides whether to pay and how much, and must notify the applicant of that decision within 15 days from the date of decision. The official reason names these points as the delegated matters the decree is meant to fill in.

Article 3-9(4) adds a route with no application: where a person has great merit in preventing a violation listed in the items of Article 18(1) of the Act, the Commissioner may, even without a payment application, select that person as a recipient and pay the reward as the Commissioner prescribes. In fixing the amount under Article 3-9(3) or (4), the Commissioner may consider whether the report, or for such a person the contributory act, formed the basis of an investigation by an investigative agency; the agency's handling result for the violation; whether sentence was suspended or execution of sentence suspended, and the kind and severity of the sentence; and the degree of contribution to preventing the violation. Matters beyond these are left to the Commissioner.

Article 3-8 is retitled 'Criteria etc. for payment of the reward for reporting unfair competition acts', and its wording is aligned with Article 16(1) of the Act: its annual cap of ten million won per person, the application to the Commissioner, the 15-day notice after decision, the factors for setting the amount, and the matters left to the Commissioner now refer to the reward under Article 16(1). The Act itself, including Articles 16 and 18, is not in this note's source pack, and the note has not read it.

What to read in the text

The addendum states one rule only: the Decree takes effect on 28 May 2026. It says nothing about pending matters, earlier conduct or earlier applications, and the official reason records that the amending Act (Act No. 20963) was promulgated on 27 May 2025 and took effect on 28 May 2026.

A file therefore needs the facts Article 3-9 makes relevant: the contributory act or report, its connection to an investigation, the agency's handling of the violation and the sentence imposed, and the degree of contribution; plus whether the route is an application under Article 3-9(2) or a selection under Article 3-9(4). The addendum lays down no rule on how a matter standing before the Commissioner on 28 May 2026 is treated.

Questions for the legislature

Article 3-9(4) lets the Commissioner select as a recipient, even 'without a payment application', a person of 'great merit in preventing' a violation, 'as the Commissioner prescribes'. The text sets no standard or time limit for that selection, and neither the addendum nor the official reason supplies one. By what criteria is 'great merit in preventing' a violation to be found under Article 3-9(4)?

Article 3-8(1) caps the Article 16(1) reward at 'ten million won' per person 'for one year', while Article 3-9(1) sets the Article 16(2) maximum at 'two hundred million won' with no period stated. The text, the addendum and the official reason do not say whether one person may receive both rewards for the same conduct or how the two limits interact. Can one person receive both a reward under Article 16(1) and one under Article 16(2) for the same contributory act or report?

When to revisit

We revisit this note when the matters the Commissioner is to prescribe under Article 3-8(5) and Article 3-9(6) are read against the Decree, or if a further amendment or published decision explains the selection without application under Article 3-9(4) or the relation between the two reward limits.