1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. (1) On May 12, 2015, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office notified the Plaintiff that the nonobviousness of the patent application in the instant case, as described in the instant paragraph (b) below, is denied by the prior invention 1 through 3 as described in the instant paragraph (c). As to this, the Plaintiff amended the claims upon submitting a written opinion on June 12, 2015, but the Plaintiff deleted the claims 3 and included them in the claims 1, thereby reducing the scope of claims 1. Notwithstanding the foregoing amendment on August 10, 2015, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office rendered a decision of rejection on the ground that the nonobviousness of the patent application in the instant case is still denied by amending the claims 4 in the instant patent application on August 13, 2015, and included the claims 1 in the claims 1.

The examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office who has filed a request for reexamination, which re-examineed “the invention described in the Claim 1 and 2 of the patent application of this case, was notified of the submission of his opinion to the effect that the inventive step is denied as the person of ordinary skill in the technical field to which the invention pertains can easily make the invention from the Prior Invention 1 to 4 described in

Accordingly, the Plaintiff amended the scope of the patent application on September 21, 2015 to further reduce the scope of the patent application. However, despite such amendment on November 17, 2015, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office rendered a decision to reject the patent application in the instant case on the ground that the nonobviousness of the invention described in the claim 1 and 2 of the instant patent application is still denied by the aforementioned prior invention.

3) On November 24, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a petition for an appeal against the decision of refusal with the Intellectual Property Tribunal No. 2015 Won6931, but the Intellectual Property Tribunal filed a petition for an appeal against the decision of refusal on February 22, 2017 (hereinafter “instant Claim No. 1”).

prior inventions 1, 3, and 4.