The concept and interpretation of employee invention in Article 7 of Taiwan Patent Act has long baffled the judges and scholars in Taiwan. The lntellectual Property Office has expressed its opinion during legislation, stating that the term "during the course of employment" in the article shall be deemed as pure employment contract mentioned in the Civil Code. The scholars, however, gradually expanded its meaning so that new types of contracts as outsourcing can be included in the article. Contrary to the scholars' suggestions, Taiwanese court adopted another approach by neglecting the term and focusing on facts like "directions from the employers" or "use of the employers' resources" as guidelines in the issue of employee invention. This article addresses that the diversity between the scholars and judges results from the fact that the interpretation of "employee invention" is blurred by the existence of the term of "during the course of employment". Though Taiwanese court adopts an approach similar to American law by focusing on the interpretation of the terms and conditions within the contract between the parties, we shall bear in mind that since American law treats patent right as pure property right, adopting a similar approach as American law, whether intentionally or not, may leave room for discussion. This article suggests that instead of focusing on the meaning of "during the course of employment", contribution to the inventions by the parties shall be emphasized.