[의장등록무효][공1983.9.15.(712),1263]
(a) Whether a type of rubber for opening and closing purposes is creative (negative);
B. Whether a new creative nature is somewhat complicated (negative)
A. The difference between the chairman of this case and the quoted design is that the design of this case is a rubber for the container container paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper paper.
B. It is difficult to view that the design of this case is somewhat complicated compared to the cited design, and thus, new creation is difficult.
Article 5 of the Design Act
claimant
Appellants
Korean Intellectual Property Trial Office No. 183 decided November 30, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the "Korean Intellectual Property Trial Office") No. 183
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the respondent.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
According to the original decision, the court below held that the registration (registration number 1 omitted) design of rubber (registration (registration number 1 omitted) for the container of the respondent for the trial (registration hereinafter this design) and the registration (registration 2 omitted) of rubber for the use of the container scrap metal of the claimant registered before the application for design registration (registration 1 omitted) are extremely similar to the shape and shape of the sealed rubber for which both are located, as stated in its decision. However, the difference between the design of this case and the quoted design is subject to the punishment of the chairperson as to the use of the quoted color as proper length, but it is hard to view that the new shape and shape of the rubber as the shape and shape of the design are unique to the shape and form of the design, such as the design's unique shape and form, since it is difficult to see that it is a new shape and form of the rubber model as it is more complicated than the design's unique shape and form.
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.
Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)