Nombex Co., Ltd. (former: Muss Co., Ltd.) (Attorney crude Dai-soo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office

September 20, 2018

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on May 27, 2018 on the case No. 2016No124 shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The process of the instant trial decision

1) On November 4, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a petition for correction trial with the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board for correction of the claim No. 1 (hereinafter “instant Claim No. 1”) in the instant registered petition (hereinafter “instant petition for correction trial”), and on February 20, 2018, the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board notified the Plaintiff that “The instant claim No. 1 device may be easily designed by a person with ordinary skills in the art to which the device pertains (hereinafter “ordinary technician”) from the prior petition No. 1 to 3,” to the effect that “The instant claim No. 1 device may be easily designed by a person with ordinary skills in the art to which the device pertains.”

2) Accordingly, on April 19, 2018, the Plaintiff submitted an amendment to correct the claims of the instant Claim No. 1 as described in Article 136(4) of the former Patent Act (amended by Act No. 14035, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same). However, on May 17, 2018, the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board rejected the instant petition for correction trial on the ground that “The instant Claim No. 1 device may be easily designed by a person of ordinary skill after the correction,” despite the Plaintiff’s amendment, the Plaintiff’s petition for correction trial of this case violates Article 136(4) of the former Patent Act (amended by Act No. 14035, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same) and Article 4(2) of the Utility Model Act, and is unlawful.

B. The registered complaint of this case

(a) The name of the device: Mobile phone cases equipped with a cell phone shielded shielded shielded by alone;

(2) Date of application/registration date/registration number: December 6, 2012 / January 8, 2014 / Utility model registration (registration number omitted)

3) The owner of a utility model right: Plaintiff

4) Claims

A) Claims at the time of registration

In the case of a mobile phone case in which the front and rear side of a mobile phone 1 is installed in a cell phone in the form of covering the front and rear side of the mobile phone and protecting the exterior of the relevant mobile phone, the above front part of the above mobile phone case is characterized by a cell phone case equipped with a cell phone shielded with a cell phone shielded by the coverer who is embodied by the medium of permanent turble and turble at the location corresponding to the Hall ICT located in the mobile phone and the point corresponding to the above mobile phone.

B) Claims based on the instant request for the correction of the instant case (amended by the Correction Statement, etc., dated April 19, 2018, and the bottom part is the part for which a request for correction has been filed)

In the case of a mobile phone case in which the front or rear side of a mobile phone is installed in the form of covering a mobile phone and protecting the exterior of the relevant mobile phone, the front part of the above mobile phone case is laid down behind the front part of the above mobile phone case, and the above front part of the above mobile phone case is composed of a cover shield, embodied with a permanent tin and trike at the point corresponding to the Hall ICT located on the mobile phone, and the above front part of the cell phone case is composed of a cover shield which is embodied with a medium of permanent tin and trike at the point corresponding to the above mobile phone, and where the above front part of the cell phone is located on the front side of the above mobile phone, it provides a self-debris signal that is detected through an trine mark installed on the above mobile phone, and where it is located on the rear side of the above mobile phone, it is provided with a cellular phone shield which is equipped with a cellular.

(v)a summary of the device;

The main technology field of the cell phone 2) is about 0 cell phone shield 1 which is equipped with 0 or more cell phone shield 2, and more detailed 0 or more cell phone shield 1 which is equipped with 0 or more cell phone shield 2, so that the cell phone shield 2 can be operated automatically (01) mobile phone shield 5 or more at the time of opening or closing the cell phone rink (2). (b) Former problem cases are provided with a separate function to protect the screen and appearance of the cell phone 2 and so that separate convenience can be provided to the users by way of 0 or more cell phone rink 2) mobile phone rink 2. The main task of this case is to provide 0 or more cell phone rink 2 with 0 or more cell phone shield 2, so that it can be solved by the mobile phone shield 4 or more.

A person shall be appointed.

In the case of a mobile phone rink in which 10 erode in accordance with this device contained within the main text is installed with various types of mobile phones, such as smartphones, blick PCs, etc. However, such mobile phones (100) are contained in the board and composed of HallIC (110) which generates clocks for the operation of the device. Accordingly, the front part of the mobile phone rink (10) installed with 10 erode (12) is opened by the user, the erode of 10 erode (10 erode) erode 20 erode (20 erode) erode 10 erode (10 erode) erode (10 erode) erode erode 20 erode erode (100 erode) erode (100 erode) erode) erode 10 erode e erode (10 erode).10 eco)

A person shall be appointed.

According to this device, under the Hall ICT that approves a license signal for operating equipment on a mobile device, such as a smartphone or blick PC, the mobile phone case has the effect of increasing user convenience because the relevant mobile phone is automatically operated at the same time as the opening and closing of the mobile phone case is opened and closed, and the shielding seat consisting of a specific structure shield that permits Hall ICT to move on a mobile device such as a smartphone or blick PC is applied. In addition, as the shielding seat consisting of a specific structure cream and permanent seat is applied, the effect of embodying Hall ICT function as a small seat, and the effect of preventing any malfunction by a license that may arise from the milching on the front side of the mobile phone case can also be prevented (see e.g., 011); / [01]

C. 1) Prior designs

1) Prior art 1

The prior petition No. 1 is related to "the method and device to prevent the malfunction of a key input unit from a portable device that can be removed from an external-type type case," published on February 4, 2008 by the Korean Registration Patent Gazette No. 10-080802, which is published on February 4, 2008, as the main contents and drawings are as follows:

본문내 포함된 표 가) 기술분야 본 발명은 휴대단말기에 관한 것으로, 특히 외장형 케이스의 착탈이 가능한 휴대단말기의 키입력부의 오동작 방지 방법 및 장치에 관한 것이다(〈5〉). 나) 종래 기술의 문제점 일반적으로 외장형 케이스는 휴대단말기 외형의 보호를 위해 비금속 재질로 이루어지는데, 이는 원치 않는 키입력이 발생하는 문제점을 유발한다. 이를 위해 종래의 휴대단말기는 홀드키(Hold Key)를 사용자에게 제공하고, 홀드키에 의해 홀드가 해제될 때만 키입력부의 키 입력을 받아들임으로써 원치않는 키눌림에 의한 키입력을 방지하였다. 그러나 이러한 방식으로 인해 사용자는 휴대단말기를 사용할 때마다 일일이 홀드키를 조작하여야 하는 불편함을 감수하여야 했다(〈6〉). 다) 기술적 과제 본 발명은 외장형 케이스의 착탈이 가능한 휴대단말기의 키입력부의 오동작을 방지하고, 사용자의 휴대단말기 사용을 편리하게 하는 방법 및 장치를 제공한다(〈7〉). 라) 과제 해결 수단 도 2를 참조하면, 외장형케이스(200)는 고정장치(미도시)를 통해 휴대단말기(100)에 착탈 가능하다. 이때, 제어부(10)는 휴대단말기(100)의 접속부A(70)로 외장형케이스(200)의 접속부B(210)가 접속되면, 외장형케이스(200)가 휴대단말기에 접속된 것으로 판단한다. 휴대단말기(100)는 소정의 위치에 감지부(60)를 포함하는데, 본 발명의 실시 예에 의한 감지부(60)가 홀 센서일 경우에 외장형케이스(200)는 홀 센서에 대응되는 위치에 자석(220)을 포함한다. 도 3을 참조하면, 도 3은 도2의 휴대단말기(100)와 외장형케이스(200)가 서로 결합된 모습을 도시하고 있다. 이렇게 결합된 외장형케이스(200)는 휴대단말기(100)를 사용할 때(예를 들어, (a)의 위치에 있을 때)는 열리고, 휴대단말기를 보호할 때는 닫히게(예를 들어, (b)의 위치에 있을 때) 된다. 도 4는 본 발명의 실시 예에 의한 휴대단말기 키입력부의 오동작을 방지하는 과정에 대한 흐름도이다. 도 2 내지 도 4를 참조하여 오동작 방지 과정에 대해 살펴보면 다음과 같다. 외장형케이스가 연결됨이 감지되면(S401), 제어부(10)는 외장형케이스의 열림 또는 닫힘을 감지한다(S402). 도 3과 같이 휴대단말기(100)와 외장형케이스(200)가 연결되면, 도2에 도시된 접속부A(70)와 접속부B(210)는 서로 접속되게 된다. 따라서 제어부(10)는 접속부A(70)로 접속부B(210)의 접속이 감지되면, 외장형케이스(200)와 휴대단말기(100)가 연결된 것으로 판단한다. 외장형케이스(200)가 휴대단말기(100)에 연결된 것으로 판단되면, 제어부(10)는 감지부(60)를 통해 외장형케이스(200)의 열림 또는 닫힘을 감지한다. 외장형케이스가 열린 것으로 감지되면(S403), 제어부(10)는 발생한 키입력에 해당하는 동작을 수행하도록 제어한다(S404). 본 발명의 실시 예에 의한 감지부(60)가 홀 센서라고 가정할 때, 외장형케이스(200)가 도 3에서 (a)와 같은 위치(열림) 또는 (b)와 같은 위치(닫힘) 이동함에 따라 자석(220)에 의한 홀 센서 주변의 자장(Magnetic Field)을 변경시킨다. 제어부(10)는 이러한 홀 센서 주변의 자장에 상태에 따라 외장형케이스(200)의 열림 또는 닫힘을 감지한다. 이를 통해, 제어부(10)는 외장형케이스(200)가 닫혀 있으면 키입력부(27)를 비활성화시켜 키입력이 발생하더라도 해당 동작을 수행하지 않는다. 이와 반대로, 제어부(10)는 외장형케이스(200)가 열려 있으면 키입력부(27)를 활성화시키고, 활성화된 키입력부(27)의 키입력에 해당하는 동작을 수행하도록 제어한다(〈21〉~〈27〉).

A person shall be appointed.

The effects of this invention in the table E contained in the main text shall be effective to promptly set up or revoke the movement of key input only by opening/pulmonary cases without a separate key input for the establishment/cancellation of the kisive action prevention by key input (=32).

2) Prior art 2

Prior designs 2 are related to the "measures to Improve or reduce self-sufficiency through inducement of self-sufficiency" published in the Patent Gazette No. 10-201-0016281, which is published on February 17, 2011, and the main contents and drawings thereof are as follows:

In the case of Do1’s own seat, self-power line is formed as Do2-1 (i) in the open state, but it does not pass through Do2-2-2 (ii) and (iii) in the case of Do2-2-2 (i) in the case of being sealed into Yke. In addition, in the case of being sealed into Yke, the self-power line has characteristics that increase in self-concentration. This has characteristics that increase in its density in terms of not being sealed into Yke. This is due to the shielding of Yke, which is caused by the shielding of the energy of Yke with neke, which is concentrated in the Yke without having the self-sufficiency distribution in the open state, and which does not constitute a self-confecte through self-congested density.

A person shall be appointed.

If it is necessary to increase self-sufficiency, this invention can be used when it is necessary to increase the level of self-sufficiency so that it can no longer be possible to increase the level of self-sufficiency due to the limit of the material or size of self-sufficiency, or when it is necessary to reduce the intensity of self-sufficiency. In addition, this invention can cover and use it in the protection of electrical and electronic parts for which errors are expected due to its own force. This invention can form a design and attachment of YOke in accordance with the functions required in the production of YOke. In other words, it is possible to select the shape of 3rd waste, side waste, and upper end waste through the production of YOke, after calculating the energy volume of tin, and calculating the optimal form of YOE by calculating it in accordance with its detailed description, 1 side, 3 keke structure, and YOke structure, but it is necessary to select the YOke structure as an appropriate type of YOE. Where it is necessary to do so, it is necessary to do so.

A person shall be appointed.

3) Prior designs 3

The preceding petition 3 is a photograph of “portable phone case” that can be opened and opened at the left and right indicated on the Internet portal site “○○○○○○” on May 26, 2012.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the trial decision of this case is unlawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) After correction, the nonobviousness of the instant Claim 1 design is not denied on the basis of prior designs for the following reasons.

A) In the instant case where the front part of the case of the mobile phone is located on the front part of the mobile phone and the case is opened, in order to promote the key input part of the mobile phone and prevent the locked phenomenon, the front part of the cell phone is provided with self-signal signals to the alone of the mobile phone, and when the shielding part is located on the front part of the mobile phone, the front part of the instant device adopted a composition that can block self-signal signals to the alone weather of the mobile phone when the shielding part is located on the rear part of the mobile phone. On the other hand, the prior part 1 uses a general seat to prevent the malfunction operation of the key input part by deviving the key input part in the case where the outer part of the case is closed. Thus, both are different solution tasks, solution methods and composition.

B) The instant Claim 1 device is premised on the premise that the front part of the mobile phone case is located on the side of the rear, while the front part of the outer part of the case cannot be located on the rear side of the mobile phone because the outer part of the outer part of the case is milched back and then the outer part of the case cannot be located on the rear side of the mobile phone, so there is no problem in all cases where the front part of the mobile phone case is laid down on the rear side.

C) Prior design 3 is the front of a Handphone case that is opened and closed to a left direction. There is no motive to combine this with prior design 1, where the front part of a Handphone is opened and closed to a vertical line.

D) The instant Claim 1 device has a function to prevent the chilling operation, even if the front part of the Handphone case where the shielding seat is located on the part of the Handphone, which is located on the front part of the Handphone. This is a new effect that cannot be entirely predicted from 1 to 3 of the prior design.

2) Nevertheless, the instant trial decision that was otherwise determined is unlawful and thus ought to be revoked.

B. Organization of issues

Since there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the instant petition for correction trial satisfies all the requirements other than the requirements under Article 136(4) of the former Patent Act, which is applicable mutatis mutandis under Article 33 of the Utility Model Act, the issue of this case ultimately is whether the instant claim for correction trial satisfies the inventive step as provided under Article 136(4) of the former Patent Act and Article 4(2) of the Utility Model Act after the correction petition.

C. Whether the inventive step of the Claim 1 device of this case was inventive after correction

1) Preparation for the instant Claim 1 device and prior art 1 after the correction

(A) the response relationship by component;

In the case of a mobile phone case in which the front and rear sides of the preceding 1 mobile phone of the instant Claim No. 1 after the revision of the table contained in the main text are installed on a mobile phone in the form of 1st, front and rear sides of the mobile phone and protect the exterior of the said mobile phone, the front part of the said mobile phone case shall be milked behind the front, rear and rear sides of the said mobile phone case (class 1), and the outer-type case (§ 6 Do 2, Do 3) which shall protect the front, rear and rear side of the mobile phone No. 1 (class 1), the front part of the said mobile phone case shall be composed of 0 mark or 20 mark-type 20 mark-type 20 mark-type mark-type 20 mark-type mark-type mark-type mark-type mark-type mark-type 20 mark-type mark-type 21).

A person shall be appointed.

(B) analysis of common points and differences;

(1) After the correction, the component element 1 of the instant Claim 1 is a mobile phone case consisting of the front and rear side of the mobile phone, and the front and rear side of the mobile phone, and the elements of the instant Claim 1, corresponding thereto, are the same as the external type case, which protects the front, rear, and sides of the front, rear, and both. However, while the external type case of the instant Claim 1, the external type case of the instant Claim 1, inasmuch as the external type case of the instant Claim 1, can be found back to the rear side of the front and rear side, it is different in that the external type case of the instant Claim 1, supra, can not be entirely milk up until the rear side, and can be opened at a certain angle (hereinafter referred to as “vehicle 1”).

After the Sheet correction, the elements of the instant Claim No. 1 design 2 are contained in the front part of the cell phone case located in the location corresponding to the alone ICT located in the cell phone, and the shielding seat is located on the front side of the cell phone, and if the shielding seat is located on the front side of the cell phone, the components of the instant Claim No. 1 design are provided with self-defense and the shielding seat is located on the side of the cell phone, it is provided with the reduced self-defense signal.

The composition of the prior design 1, which is corresponding to this, is common with the above components 2 in that it provides self-defense signals detected through alone ICT when it is located on the front side of the mobile phone case, by installing a permanent seat on the front side of the mobile phone case corresponding to alone ICT, for the purpose of controlling the mobile phone.

However, while the components 2 are permanent ones and trikes, there are no elements to cover the front line 1, the front line 1 does not appear, and accordingly there is a difference in that the front line 2 does not appear in the front line 1 where the front line is located on the rear side of the mobile phone (hereinafter “the front line 2”).

2) Examining differences

A) Difference 1

In the preceding case, the front, rear and front sides of the mobile phone are covered by the front, rear, and front side of the mobile phone, but the mobile phone case, which is opened behind the front side of the front side, and according to the descriptions and images of the evidence Nos. 10 and 11, the front side of the instant Claim Nos. 1, the Internet newspaper article (the machine and Donet Korea) stating that the fluor case, which can be connected to the front side of the instant Claim No. 1, leads a seal, is posted on the front side of the front line of the instant Claim No. 1, and the cell phone Nos. 10 and 11, may be recognized. In full view of the foregoing, if the front line of the instant Claim No. 1, the mobile phone Nos. 3, which can be seen as being widely known prior to the filing date of the instant Claim No. 1, the front line and the cell phone No. 3, the mobile phone No. 1, which is widely known in the same way as the front line of the mobile phone No. 1, can be known.

Therefore, it is difficult to view that there is any particular technical difficulty in deriving cases in which a person with ordinary skills changed the front, rear, and one side of the mobile phones 1's cell phone cases in the preceding front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front front

B)Difference 2

The specification (005) - - - - - - 2 of the prior design 2 (005) is indicated as follows. According to this, the shielding stone, which has installed the prior design 2 in one side, may be “use when it is necessary to weaken the strength of the power” and “shielding in the protection of the electronic parts expected to be erroneous due to its own power.”

Although it is necessary to increase self-sufficiency, this invention can be used when it is necessary to increase the level of self-sufficiency to a direction that would no longer be possible due to the limit of the material or size of self-sufficiency, or when it is necessary to reduce the intensity of self-sufficiency. In addition, this invention can also cover and use it in the protection of the electronic parts expected to be erroneous due to its own force. This invention can be achieved by designing and attaching a YOke in accordance with the function required in the production of YOke. In other words, the shape of YOke may be designed in accordance with the function required for the production of YOke, 3 shield, color, shielding, and upper shield, and the appropriate material can be calculated in consideration of investment ratio and processing, and the material can be produced by calculating the stude energy volume of tin, and the invention is permanently manufactured in accordance with its designed direction and assembly. In particular, the YOkeke can be used only in the case of self-defluentization of the stude in terms of its own function.

In addition, according to the statements or images of the evidence Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 9, the specification of the patented invention, etc. disclosed prior to the filing date of the claim No. 1 of this case can be acknowledged that the following contents of the patented invention, etc. disclosed to the public prior to the filing date of the claim No. 1 of this case, and that the video posted at the △△△△△△ on July 22, 2012 shows the fact that the front cover is installed on the cell phone case of ○○

A person shall be appointed.

In full view of this, prior to the filing of the instant claim 1 device, inventions, etc. are already developed, etc. to recognize the impact of the self-defluence on the electronic device on the electronic device, and to technically solve it, and in the process, various shielding devices have been used to control the impact of the self-defluence on the electronic device. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that it is easy for a person with ordinary skills to combine the 2-line of the prior claim 1 with the cases of the mobile phone with the device installed with the HallIC, which corresponds to the electronic device, in order to block the self-defluence in a specific direction, it is reasonable to deem that it is easy for a person with ordinary skills to combine the 1-line of the prior claim 2 with the case of the mobile phone installed with the 1-line of the prior claim 1 in the application of the prior claim 1.

In addition, the detailed statement(200) of the prior art 1 in the first art 3 to (a) is changed by a person's own seat (220) with the movement of the same location(s) as that of the prior art 3 to (a) or (b). Control section(10) does not carry out the prior art 1 in the event the outer art 200 (200) is closed, even if the external art 27) is not activated (27) and the key power is generated by non-activizing the key power unit(s) of the prior art 1, it is difficult to find any technical feature to control the first art 1 so that it does not carry out the relevant action even if it comes to contact with a person's own seat even if it comes to contact with a person's own seat, so it is difficult to find that the prior art 1 is different from the prior art 2 to prevent any combination of the users' intent to operate the Hand at the front of the prior art 1.

C) Reorganization

In full view of the above circumstances, the differences in the structure of Paragraph 1 of this case and the above structure of Paragraph 1 of this case, after correction, can be derived by a person with ordinary skills combining the two and three preceding designs 1 in prior art 1, to overcome extremely easily, and thus, it is reasonable to deem that the nonobviousness of the instant Claim 1 device after correction is denied.

3) The plaintiff's assertion and judgment on this issue

A) After the correction, the Plaintiff asserts that the technical task of the instant Claim 1 is to prevent key input by self-signal signals and eliminate the key input phenomenon by self-sufficiency in the event the case is located on the front side of the case. On the other hand, the prior Claim 1 only aims to prevent key input by self-signal when the case is closed. Thus, the technical task is different.

However, even if the case is closed in the case of prior design 1, the fact that only the matters to prevent key input by self-signal are written, unlike the case of the prior design 1 after the correction, the fact that the mobile phone case commenced in the prior design 1 does not have a structure of sucking behind the front part, unlike the case of the prior design 1 after the correction, and that the specification of the prior design 1 states, “if the external upper part (10) is closed (200) where the external upper part (200) is closed, if the external upper part (27) is not activated, the relevant action shall not be performed even if the external upper part (27) is generated,” so it is reasonable to view that the case of the prior design 1 is located in the prior design 3, which is ordinarily used before the filing date of the prior design 1 of this case, i.e., where the front part can be changed to a case after the front part, the plaintiff's assertion that the new part will not be seen as being installed in the back part of the front part of the mobile phone can be accepted.

B) The Plaintiff asserts that there is no motive to change the cell phone cases of the prior design 1, which is opened and closed to the upper lower direction, to the cases of the prior design 3, which are completely sucked into the front side, since it is possible to operate without completely sucking the front side with the rear side.

However, as seen earlier, the case of the 3 mobile phone cases of the prior design is generally used before the filing date of the instant Claim No. 1 device. As such, it is difficult to see that there is any particular technical difficulty in changing the case of the 1 mobile phone case of the prior design to the mobile phone case of the prior design No. 3, and it is merely a design change that can be appropriately selected by an ordinary technician in consideration of the convenience of the use of a mobile phone. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is rejected.

C) The Plaintiff asserts that it is not easy to apply the prior art 2 to the prior art 2, since there is no implication or implication that the shielding stone can be applied to the mobile phone case, it is not easy to apply it to the prior art 1, and it is not easy to combine the prior art 1 by specifying the direction of the shielding stone 2 in the prior art 2.

However, as seen earlier, the specification 2 of the prior design explicitly states that “electric and electronic equipment expected to be erroneous in its function due to its own force” is to be used in the “electric and electronic equipment expected,” so it is difficult for an ordinary technician to deem that there is any particular technical difficulty in applying it to a mobile phone case installed in the vicinity of a mobile phone, which is one type of electrical and electronic equipment. In addition, in applying the prior design 1 to the cover 2 of the prior design, it is a matter that is obvious to an ordinary technician in order to prevent the malfunction of a mobile phone due to his own force to the direction toward the front part of the mobile phone and install a key for blocking his own force on the part of the prior design. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s aforementioned assertion is rejected.

D) The Plaintiff asserts that the evidence No. 9 is a new evidence for which the opportunity to present opinions is not given at the trial stage, and thus, it cannot be adopted as evidence to deny the inventive step of the claim No. 1 device of this case after correction.

However, as acknowledged earlier, Eul evidence No. 9 was submitted as evidence to acknowledge that the use of a shielding plate was widely used in this technology to minimize the impact of human resources stored in the electronic equipment on the electronic equipment at the time of filing of the application for the instant claim No. 1 device. Since it cannot be deemed as being submitted as evidence denying the inventive step of the instant claim No. 1 device after correction, the plaintiff's assertion is rejected.

D. Whether the trial decision of this case is unlawful

Therefore, the nonobviousness of the instant claim 1 device after correction is denied since ordinary technicians could easily make a device through the combination of prior art 1 through 3. Therefore, the instant request for correction is unlawful. Therefore, the instant decision on trial in conclusion cannot be said to be erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as asserted by the Plaintiff.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Gung (Presiding Judge)

1) The prior art 1 and prior art 2 are patented inventions, and the prior art 3 are photographs published on the Internet. The prior art 1 and prior art 2 are “the prior art” for convenience in comparison with the instant registered art.