A. The Plaintiff related to the parties is a stock company that runs the business of manufacturing and selling automatic power plant location, and Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is a stock company that manufactures and sells telecommunications equipment, manufactures and sells power plant location, etc., and Defendant C is working as the representative director of the Defendant Company from March 2009.

B. The Plaintiff’s criminal complaint and non-prosecution decision against the Defendants and the Defendant all manufacture and sell the Ka Roter’s location. The Plaintiff’s representative director D, around May 201, claimed that “Defendant C produced and sold the same automatic location as “Automatic location” with patent rights, and “electric control equipment and its method,” and then infringed the Plaintiff’s patent rights.” However, on August 19, 201, the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office filed a complaint against the Defendants as a violation of the Patent Act, on the grounds that some of the Plaintiff’s patented invention was invalid, and that it is difficult to view that Defendant C’s electronic monitoring equipment produced by Defendant C infringed the Plaintiff’s patent rights.

C. On August 26, 2011, at around 11:43, Defendant C’s office located in the second floor of the building E in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, the case of violation of the Patent Act filed against us by using a computer installed therein was terminated as a non-suspect. (In the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office), and under the title “the difference in the patent of the two companies”, “if the sn beam beam beam beam beamline is used for the purpose of human reduction, it may cause damage to the network and damage to the human body by causing damage to the human body.” It is written and posted on the Defendant Company’s website (F bulletin board).