특허법위반
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
1. The summary of the facts charged is the DNA representative director, a corporation that sells small home appliances, massages, etc. from 1,00,000 Won-si, Seocheon-si C, 606.
From February 1, 2014, the Defendant infringed the victim’s patent right by importing 300 Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma3200B from China to sell shopping mall sales business operators with a 300 Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma3200B equipped with the same Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-
2. Provisions of applicable provisions to the facts charged in judgment: Judgment dismissing a complaint filed by the victim on September 9, 2015, which is after prosecution is instituted under Article 225 (2) of the Patent Act (Article 327 subparagraph 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act).