The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The lower court determined that the instant Claim No. 1 (Patent No. 923282) was not included in the scope of the right to the instant Claim No. 1 (Patent No. 923), since the instant patent invention (Patent No. 92382) and the instant invention subject to confirmation as indicated in the lower judgment was not identical with or equal to the “combined stones” of the instant Claim No. 1, and thus, the instant invention subject to confirmation did not fall under the scope of the right to the instant Claim No. 1.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to interpretation of the scope of patent

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.