2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. On December 2, 2015, the Plaintiffs filed for a trial for invalidation of the instant patent invention with the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board against the Defendant on the ground that “The nonobviousness of the instant patent invention claims 1 through (5) and (15) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board violated the natural rules, and thus cannot be granted a patent, or is denied by combining inventions 1, 2, 3, and 7, the nonobviousness of the patent registration is invalidated.” In the instant trial proceeding, the Defendant filed for a correction request for correction of the contents of the instant patent invention claims 1 and 15 (b)4 of the instant patent invention as described in paragraphs (1) and (15) of the Patent Act, on February 11, 2016.

(2) On November 18, 2016, the Intellectual Property Tribunal recognized the instant request for correction as lawful, and rendered the instant trial decision dismissing the Plaintiffs’ request for invalidation on the ground that “the instant patent invention does not contravene natural rules and does not deny its inventive step by prior inventions.” (b) The name of the instant patent invention 1: the date of application and method of preventing contamination of the accelerator heads and the date of registration 2) / registration number : the date of application / the date of June 29, 2008 / June 22, 2009 / Defendant 4) connects the instant patent invention with the institutions of the head office of the claim 1, the number of the instant patent invention, and the instant patent invention’s claim 1 to 5, and the instant patent invention’s claim 1 to 5, and the instant patent invention’s claim 1 to 3: the instant patent invention’s claim / the instant patent invention’s claim / the instant patent invention’s claim / registration number to be made by means of the head office outside the wind heads that were made by the above.