1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added a judgment on the assertion emphasized by the court of first instance (other than that, the grounds alleged by the plaintiff in the court of first instance in the appeal do not differ from the contents alleged by the plaintiff in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance and the court of first instance are reviewed again along with the plaintiff's assertion, the judgment of the court of first instance which rejected the plaintiff's assertion is justified), Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, and the main sentence of Article

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. 1) The summary of the argument that the notice of payment of patent fees was unlawful is that H made a provisional attachment of the patent right of this case and paid 7,8 minutes of patent fees. Thus, the Defendant, despite having received a notification of payment to H of the provisional attachment registrant liable for the payment of patent fees, was unlawful since the Defendant issued a notification of payment of patent fees to the Plaintiff in prison. In addition, this constitutes a case where the Plaintiff was unable to pay patent fees due to a cause not attributable to the Plaintiff. 2) According to the evidence No. 32, according to the judgment of evidence No. 32, H received a decision of provisional attachment of the patent right of this case on July 16, 2014 (U.S. District Court Decision 2014Kadan50326) and registered provisional attachment on July

However, Article 80(1) of the Patent Act provides that “an interested party may pay a patent fee regardless of the intent of the person liable to pay the patent fee,” and Article 80(2) provides that “Where a patent fee has been paid under paragraph (1), an interested party may claim reimbursement of the relevant expenses to the extent that the person liable to pay the patent fee gains current profit.” This provision is an interested party who is a person entitled to the provisional attachment registration of the patent of this case, and the Plaintiff may demand reimbursement of the patent fee regardless of the intent of