The Korea Intellectual Property Protection Agency has issued the sixth recruitment notice for the 2026 Export-Challenged Enterprise IP Risk Response Capability Enhancement Program, providing export enterprises with overseas IP dispute risk diagnosis and response support. This article explains the program positioning, application arrangements and information boundaries of the notice, and discusses the trademark risk pre-preparation approach that Chinese outbound enterprises can learn from, as well as which matters cannot be directly applied.
The Korea Intellectual Property Protection Agency (KOIPA, a public institution under Korea’s intellectual property authority) has issued Business Notice No. 2026-79, launching the 6 recruitment for the “Risk Response” category of the “2026 Export-Challenged Enterprise IP Risk Response Capability Enhancement Program.” The notice states the program’s purpose as: through risk diagnosis and response for overseas IP disputes of export-challenged enterprises, supporting enterprises in stably entering overseas markets and enhancing export competitiveness.
The application period is from 2026 year 10 month 22 day (Thursday) to 10 month 30 day (Friday) 16:00. Applicants must log in to the business management system (ip-navi.or.kr/ipdrms), fill out the application form online and submit the required documents; in terms of application method, according to the notice’s wording, there are two paths: “designated implementing agency” and “open call (공모),” and applicants choose one before submitting. The consultation channel is the Strategic Industry Support Office of the Korea Intellectual Property Protection Agency (telephone and email are in the notice).
What this notice is and what it is not need to be viewed separately.
It is a domestic program supported by the Korean government budget, aimed at Korean export-oriented enterprises. “Export-challenged enterprise” is a category term in Korean policy, referring to enterprises that aspire to or have just begun attempting exports, not “challenging enterprises.” Therefore, enterprises in China cannot directly apply to this program as foreign applicants; whether a Chinese enterprise with a legal entity or subsidiary in Korea can apply as a local entity depends on the eligibility clauses in the full text of the notice—the paragraphs captured this time do not include that part, and it is necessary to check the original notice.
It is also not a trademark registration subsidy, nor a dispute representation service. The notice paragraphs do not list trademark-specific content, diagnostic standards, or the specific scope of support available; adding these contents can only be inferred from the program name and purpose and cannot be treated as established arrangements.
The program itself cannot be copied directly, but one arrangement is worth noting: IP risk handling is placed at the export preparation stage, with professional institutions diagnosing enterprises and funding coming from government support, rather than responding only after a dispute arises.
Trademark risk especially fits this sequence. If, after a brand enters the target market, it is discovered that prior obstacles exist, that the core classes do not cover the goods or services actually sold, or that the registered trademark owner is inconsistent with the operating entity, the cost of changing the mark, adding classes, or adjusting ownership is usually far higher than prior search and layout. The common point of these problems is: the later they are discovered, the fewer options remain.
For readers preparing to go overseas, three things can be checked next: first, whether the brand has conducted trademark searches in the target market and whether there are obvious prior obstacles; second, whether the classes and goods/services covered by existing registrations or applications are consistent with the actual export products; third, whether the registered trademark owner is consistent with the export operating entity, and whether the evidence of use can support subsequent enforcement. These three checks do not depend on participation in any support program and are basic work for outbound layout.
If an enterprise is interested in the Korean market, it can watch for subsequent notices for this type of program, but the order should be: first confirm whether itself (or a local entity) meets the application conditions listed in the notice, then assess the match between the program content and its own trademark needs. China also has channels for overseas intellectual property dispute response guidance and rights protection assistance for outbound enterprises; the specific scope of acceptance and application conditions are subject to information published by local intellectual property authorities.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Can Chinese export enterprises directly apply for this Korean IP risk response support program?
A: It should not be understood that way. This notice is a domestic support program issued by the Korea Intellectual Property Protection Agency for Korean export enterprises, and the applicants are in principle Korean enterprises; the paragraphs captured this time do not include the eligibility clauses. Enterprises in China cannot directly apply; enterprises with a legal entity or subsidiary in Korea should check the full text of the notice to verify whether they are eligible to apply.
Q: What is the relationship between this type of program and trademark risk?
A: The notice states the program’s purpose as risk diagnosis and response for overseas IP disputes, and trademarks are part of IP, so the direction is related to trademark risk. However, these paragraphs do not list trademark-specific content, diagnostic standards, or specific service forms, and it cannot be inferred from this that the program necessarily covers trademark search, registration, or enforcement.
Q: What should be prepared on the trademark side before going overseas?
A: From the perspective of putting risk first, enterprises can first organize the search situation for the brand in the target market, the coverage of core classes and goods/services, the trademark owner, and existing evidence of use. These materials are both the basis for judging layout gaps and the background information usually needed when applying for external support or engaging professional services.
Source: Korea Intellectual Property Protection Agency Business Notice No. 2026-79 (application period from 2026 year 10 month 22 day 16:00 to 10 month 30 day 16:00).
Note: This article is a general compilation of intellectual property information and does not constitute legal advice for specific cases; the content of the notice is subject to the original Korean text.
This article is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice on a specific matter. Editorial standards ↗
← Back to LEGAL MARK Insights