In the telecommunications and medical fields, as interest in standard essential patents (SEP) increases and SEP disputes intensify, it is urgent to find effective SEP dispute resolution methods. Therefore, in this article, research is conducted on the draft rule published by the European Commission (EC) in April 2023 to resolve disputes between SEP holders and implementers, focusing on the conciliation system that helps SEP holders and implementers sign license agreements. Section II introduces the current standard essential patent dispute resolution procedure. The standard essential patent dispute resolution procedure consists of six steps: warning, expression of intention to implement contract, presentation of contract details, presentation of counter-contract, deposit of license, and FRAND determination by a third party. SEP holders must send a warning to anyone suspected of patent infringement, so this warning is essential before filing a lawsuit. The person who receives the warning must clarify the intention to conclude the contract, and the SEP holder then presents the contract details. The implementer may present a counter-contract for the contract details presented by the SEP holder. If no agreement is reached, a third party will decide the FRAND license. The main purpose of the EU SEP draft is to provide a procedure for facilitating the conclusion of an implementation contract between the SEP holder and the implementer. Its core is to rely on the EUIPO SEP Center and its conciliator to realize the procedure. EUIPO establishes a SEP center to manage SEP registration and review, determine FRAND commitments, and conciliate SEP disputes. The conciliator is in charge of negotiations between the parties, and if no agreement is reached between the parties, the conciliator must submit a proposal. Sections IV and V mainly studied the mediation system of the draft, the relationship between the current standard essential patent dispute resolution procedure, and the litigation procedure, and the characteristics of conciliation, and analyzed the conciliation of the draft and revised draft from both binding and compulsory aspects. Since the birth of the draft, EU SEP holders have been concerned about the possible 'hold-out' problem. In addition, there are many voices that the EU SEP conciliation system may have a negative impact on SMEs. Nevertheless, it is thought that the proposed conciliation system can play a positive role in regulating the behavior of leading companies, preventing patent abuse, and promoting transparent negotiations. It is worth noting that in the European Parliament's review of the draft, which ended in February 2024, the European Parliament officially removed the contradictory provisions of the draft, thereby depriving it of the binding force of the conciliation. However, the European Parliament did not revise much about other regulations. In other words, the EU SEP conciliation system was evaluated positively overall after review by the European Parliament. The text also introduced the possibility that the conciliation system would enter Korea. It is expected that how this conciliation system will be implemented and developed in Europe and other countries in the future.