2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On the ground that the Plaintiff filed an application on April 22, 1997 and registered on June 18, 1999, the Plaintiff is the owner of the utility model right in the attached Form 1 (hereinafter “instant registered petition”). The Plaintiff filed a petition for a trial to confirm the scope of rights of the instant Claim Nos. 1 and 3 (hereinafter “instant Claim Nos. 1 and 3”) on the ground that the instant petition for registration contains both the elements of Claim Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter “instant petition”).

B. The registered device of this case is related to the refeasible machine that can be altered from the wing box (the board inside the wing box where the bees of bees of bees of bees of bees of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes of bes).

【Evidence: No dispute between the Parties】

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the trial decision

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Although the instant Claim 3 device is a subordinate claim to the instant Claim 1, it should have been judged separately by each claim in comparison with the instant Claim 1 and the instant Claim, the instant trial decision erred by combining the instant Claim 1 and 3 devices. The instant claim 1 and 3 is an automatic display method included in the instant Claim 1 device, or is equal to the instant Claim 3 device’s automatic display method, and thus, the instant claim 1 and 3 device is subject to confirmation.

(b) Markets:

(1) A rough composition of the first and third devices of this case

The device of Paragraph 1 of this case is provided with a discharge outlet (12) to emit the penalty which is stored at the time of the alteration with the upper part’s shape. The low surface plate (11) is installed with a certain slope angle (10) and is installed inside the twit line (23) and is connected with the revolving axis (61) by vertical support (22) so as to ensure that the remainder of the reticulator is installed at a fixed rate of 4 times below the outer line of the reticulator so that it can be separated from the upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part from the upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part at intervals of 30 reticulator to be separated from the upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s second part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s 2nd part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part’s upper part.

(2) Comparing the instant Claim 1 with the automatic display method on the subject of confirmation

이 사건 제1항 고안의 청구범위에서는 자동정렬수단(40)이 어떻게 이루어져 있는지 그 구성에 대하여 전혀 기재를 하지 않은 채 회전틀체(20)의 회전이 정지되었을 때 수용틀체(30)의 선단이 자동으로 채밀통(10)의 중앙으로 정렬되도록 한다고 그 기능만을 기재하고 있는바(갑 제4호증), 이와 같이 등록고안의 청구범위의 기재가 기능적 표현인 경우에는 고안의 상세한 설명과 도면의 기재를 참고하여 실질적으로 그 의미 내용을 확정하여야 하므로( 대법원 2001. 6. 29. 선고 98후2252 판결 참조) 보건대, 이 사건 등록고안의 상세한 설명에는 자동정렬수단에 관하여 ‘수용틀체가 회전틀체에 설치될 때 회동축(31)의 하단보다 상단을 채밀통의 중앙부로 기울도록 하여 소정의 경사각(θ)에 의하여 회전틀체가 정지되었을 때 수용틀체의 선단이 채밀통의 중앙부로 정렬되도록 하는 것이다.’, ‘회전틀체가 정지하면 수용틀체는 소정의 경사각에 의하여 자동으로 정렬되어지므로’라고 각 기재되어 있고, 자동정렬수단이 나와 있는 별지 제1의 그림 3에는 이와 같이 수용틀체가 기울어진 구성이 도시되어 있어서(갑 제4호증), 이 사건 제1항 고안의 자동정렬수단은 수용틀체가 회전틀체에 설치될 때 회동축의 하단보다 상단을 채밀통의 중앙부로 기울어지도록 한 구성이라고 해석하여야 한다.

In comparison with the automatic display method of the instant Claim 1 device in comparison with the instant device subject to the confirmation of the automatic display method in the instant device subject to the acceptance framework, the consumption rinking (14) in the instant device subject to the confirmation body (13) does not function as an automatic display method because the lower end consists of vertical reduction (13) and the lower end consists of vertical reduction (13), and the automatic display method in the instant device subject to the confirmation body is not all capable of carrying the function as an automatic display method. The automatic display method in the instant device subject to the confirmation body is composed of fixing the two parts of the connecting 11 (11) and the original board (18) (the evidence No. 5-1, 2). The instant device and the instant device subject to the confirmation are composed of the two parts of the connecting 19 (1) device, and it is difficult to view that the automatic display method in the instant device subject to the confirmation as being included in the automatic display method or its equivalents in the instant device.

(3) Comparing the instant Claim 3 with the automatic display method on the subject of confirmation

In the event that the automatic display of the device of Paragraph 1 of this case is installed in the body frame (20), it is organized so that the upper part (10) central part is above the lower part of the body frame (31). The detailed description of the proposed registration of this case is as follows: “The automatic display method of the device of this case is equipped with 42 fixed lines (41) on the line of the steel belt (21) with the automatic display method such as the above, and the two lines of the sprinklers are fixed on the line (41) with the upper part of the body frame and the automatic display method of the device of this case can not be seen as being used even if it is connected to both parts of the body frame (No. 41), so it is difficult to view the automatic display method of the device of this case as an independent display method of the device of this case as an independent display method of the device of this case to be a fixed installation of the body frame of the upper part of the body of this case, and it is difficult to see that it is a fixed installation of the body frame of this case.

On the other hand, even when comparing only the automatic display method using a sprinkler added to the instant Claim 3 device and only the automatic display method in the device subject to confirmation with the automatic display method attached to the instant Claim 3 device, the automatic display method using a sprinkler added to the instant Claim 3 device is a component of the line of the steel belt, fixing the center of monitoring on the line, and connecting the two lines of monitoring to the upper part of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of acceptance. On the other hand, the automatic display method in the instant Claim 3 device subject to confirmation is difficult to view that the two parts of the sprinkler (No. 4, No. 5-1, No. 2, and No. 18) connected to the two parts of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the acceptance of the instant Claim 3 device, and thus, it is difficult to view that the automatic display method in the instant Claim 3 device differs from the two parts of the body of the body.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, the instant petition does not fall within the scope of the right of the device of paragraphs 1 and 3 of this case. Although the instant petition was not separately determined by the instant trial decision, the instant petition does not fall within the scope of the right of the device of this case. However, since the claims of paragraphs 1 and 3 of this case are functionally expressed, the instant petition does not fall within the scope of the right of the device of this case. Accordingly, the instant petition for confirmation is legitimate.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Sung-ho (Presiding Judge)