2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. (1) On April 18, 2014, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter referred to as “the instant patent application Claim No. 1” and the remainder of the claims are referred to as “instant Claim No. 1”) of the instant patent application invention on April 18, 2014 by a person having ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains pursuant to Articles 1 and 2 of the Prior Invention 1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as “ordinary technician”).

(2) On May 19, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a petition for a trial seeking the revocation of the foregoing decision of refusal (No. 2014 won2951) with the Intellectual Property Tribunal on the ground that the nonobviousness of the patent application invention is denied.

3) On January 21, 2015, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered the instant trial decision dismissing the Plaintiff’s request for a trial on the ground that the nonobviousness of the instant Claim No. 1 by prior invention 1 and 2 is denied. In a patent application, where the claims were made in more than one claim, and there is no ground to reject the Plaintiff’s request for a trial on the ground that all of the claims should be rejected. (b) The Plaintiff’s title of the instant invention (Evidence No. 1) 1: B2: filing date: application number: C/D3: The instant patent application invention is related to the method of providing online assessment services by the problem bank method, which provides individual online assessment questions (number / 001). In order to solve the problem where there is an online assessment issue or fraudulent act, even if the same problem is identical, the applicant’s answer included in the objective selection, and the method of preparing online signals by mixing the order of each claim with each other, making it impossible to complete the method of online assessment, and make it impossible to provide an online assessment method of communications.