Whether an interpretation of the scope of right in a registered petition can be made except for those matters which are indispensable for the composition of a device at the time of filing an application for utility model registration, on the ground that the part described in the scope of a claim for registration is relatively important among the elements of the device at the stage of exercising the right (

The Utility Model Act stipulates that a claim within the scope of a request for registration of a utility model shall be described only with matters which are not indispensable for the composition of a device. Whether or not certain matters which are indispensable for the composition of a device should be described within the scope of a request for registration is left to the freedom of applicants. An applicant may make an amendment to increase, decrease, or change the scope of a request for registration within the scope of the specification or drawings initially accompanying the application before the certified copy of the decision on public notice on application is served, but after the certified copy of the decision on public notice on application is served, the extension or change of the scope of the request for registration is not allowed. In light of the fact that the technical scope of the proposal on the registration is determined by the matters specified within the scope of the request for registration, which are not indispensable for the composition of the device, even though it is described within the scope of the request for registration as one of the elements of the device, its disregarding the scope is de facto recognized after the ex post facto change in the scope of the request for registration.

Article 8 (4) 3 and (4) 3 of the former Utility Model Act (amended by Act No. 5577 of September 23, 1998) (see current Article 9 (4) 3)

Han Young Electronic Co., Ltd. (Patent Attorney Park Young-chul, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Oars Co., Ltd. (Patent Attorney Cho Jae-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

March 10, 2005

1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on June 30, 2004 on the case No. 1281 shall be revoked;

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the instant trial decision

A. The defendant is the right holder of the registered complaint of this case with the following contents.

(1) Name: Dial fluor fluor of a small fluor.

(2) Date of registration/registration number: September 15, 1995/90362

(3) Date/application number: April 14, 1992/ No. 1992-6153

(4) The scope of requests for utility model registration shall be as specified in attached Form 1.

B. On June 17, 2003, the plaintiff's complaint for confirmation (attached Form 2) on the "Gran ice operation device" belongs to the plaintiff's right scope (negative) to seek a trial decision that does not belong to the defendant's right scope of the registered complaint of this case (negative). On June 30, 2004, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal deliberated the case as 203 Doz.1281, and tried three power failure (7) and three Luxembourgs (8) on the registered complaint of this case were formed with the same thickness, and it is hard to find that three Luxembourgs (40) and three Luxembourgs (50) have the same effect as that of the registered complaint of this case, and it constitutes a combination of three Luxembourgs (40) and three Luxembourgs (50) of the registered complaint of this case, and it is hard to find the two 17 Gaum gate's original form and 17) of the registered complaint of this case.

[Evidence] The purport of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion on the legitimacy of the instant trial decision

A. Summary of the grounds for revocation of the Plaintiff’s trial decision

(1) In light of the following, the instant registered device is not new since it is substantially identical to the comparable device publicly known or publicly implemented in Korea prior to the filing date of the application, and thus, its scope of rights cannot be recognized.

(A) The registration of this case’s main body and the bodyium showt, a means to prevent the external appearance of the front central body of the Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro (1) and the front center of the front center combined with the bodyium 1 of the comparable Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro Doro na, are only different from the place where the home was formed, and all of the

(B) The combination means of Daice body and tyress in the instant registered appeal form consisting of 3 power kids (7) and 3 Luxembourg (8) installed in the original form in the vicinity of the Warsaw (2) in the face of the central branch after combining Daice body (16) combination with Daice body body (17) and Daium body (6), which combines Doice body body with 15's original home (17) and Doium body (17). The combinations of 15's body and 16's body are different from 17's body and 17's body (17's body). The combinations of Doice body and 3 are different from Daice body and 6's body, respectively, which combines Doice body and Doium unit, which combines Doium unit with 15's body and 17's body and 15's body (17's body) in its original form.

(C) The method of turning off the body of the instant registered body consists of “minimum Luxembourg point (10) and maximum Luxembourg point (12) formed at the center of the original home (17) of the ice Doz (15) and the largest Luxembourg body (12) formed at the center of the instant registration body (17),” and “minimum and maximum trilet (13,14) installed on the left side of the snow boom (11).” Accordingly, the comparative 2 consists of “the regulatory stone installed at the center of the ice k,” and “the snow ice knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif.

(D) The means to reduce the adjustment error of the instant registered device consists of the letters (4) of scke sckes attached to the inner side of the original home (17) and scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke scke 1). Accordingly, the comparative device sc

(E) Ultimately, in the combined means of Daice body and scars case, the comparative designs did not express Doice body body body (16) combined with Doice body body (15)’s original body body (15), and did not install Doice body body body (16) divided into power and Luxembourg. While the instant registered device and comparative designs are different in the form and number of regulatory instruments, this is merely a degree to which a simple change of design or a person with ordinary knowledge in the relevant technical field can easily change its shape.

(2) The instant petition for inspection lacks essential elements of the instant petition for registration, and thus does not fall under the scope of the right.

(A) Composition differences

① With respect to the combined means of Daice body knife and typhs knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife g.

② The instant registered garage is composed of Luxembourgs in the center of the original home (17). On the other hand, the minimum angles (130) and the maximum angles (130''') in the area subject to confirmation are installed directly on the upper side of the case, and the installation location and shape are completely different.

(b) As to the effect of action:

① The registered device of this case consists of a unit essential to a string machine, and it is possible to separately form a original string unit (17) in order to combine the thring body with a original unit (17) on the string body. Therefore, the string body of this case in the registered device of this case can only apply to a unit of a string unit in a string machine, while the string body of this case can only be applied to a unit of a string unit in a string unit, on the other hand, since the string unit does not form a original unit, it can also be applied to any string unit if the size of a combined storage unit is the same.

(2) Since two carbon (21' 21'') have been formed in a livestock combination book, ice body and ice body can be safely combined with ices without a separate combination method (in the case of the instant registered garage, the original home and original body) because ices (21' 21' 21') are flexibly combined with typhs.

(3) Since the thickness of 1 parts (41, 51) which are the parts combined with the original home (140), the height of the body of 1 parts (41, 51), which is a part combining the two parts in the original home (140), can be easily separated and assembled, and at the time of use it can be easily cut off and assembled, and the ice may be easily cut off at the time of use. In addition, 2 parts (42, 52) are capable of forming the breadth widely in the original line to secure the smooth and sufficient maths in the case (100), so the establishment angle in the original line may be maintained safely, and the change in the establishment angle in accordance with external conditions, such as vibration, may be prevented.

④ Since the device subject to confirmation does not have a original home, a minimum and maximum angle (130, 130's) is installed in a line-to-face tamper (130, 130's) to be seen on the face of the case, and the contact tamper (80, 80's) acting as such is formed so that it can have a voluntary height within the axis (60's). However, even if it does not interfere with the performance of the operation, the minimum and maximum angle (13, 14) that connects with the Luxembourg (17) formed at the center of the original home (17) in the registration device of this case should be formed within the original home (17). Thus, close processing is required, and it may result in transformation at the time of using it for a long time because it does not have a solid strawer and strawer.

(C) Therefore, the instant device cannot be deemed as simple design modification or equivalents in the instant registration device. Thus, the instant device subject to confirmation does not fall under the scope of the right to the instant registered device, and the instant device does not fall under the scope of the right to the instant device. The instant device does not fall under the scope of the instant device, since the instant device does not fall under the scope of the right to the instant device.

B. Summary of the defendant's assertion

(1) The plaintiff's submission of evidence has a problem of time.

The Plaintiff asserted that the registered complaint in this case is not new, and submitted the comparative complaint listed in the attached Table 3, which was not submitted at the trial stage. However, this is because the Defendant was deprived of the opportunity to be judged on the technical similarity between the above comparative complaint and the registered complaint in this case in the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal, the comparative complaint and the Plaintiff’s assertion related thereto cannot be considered as data for the determination of the newness of the registered complaint in this case.

(2) The comparative design 2 and 3 cannot be deemed to have been publicly announced and used prior to the filing of the instant registered complaint.

In light of the fact that the body 1 on the body is printed on 88.12, the body of the subject subject matter 1 on the body : the date of production : 8.12, it can be deemed that it was conducted in Korea prior to the date of the application of the registration of the instant case ( April 14, 1992). However, the subject subject matter 2 is being produced by a Japanese company, and the body is 2310ON, and the subject matter 3 is not presumed to be the manufacturing year immediately from the set number ("2310ON"), and the subject matter 3 is attached to the product at the time of inspection (91/02) but the subject matter 3 cannot be regarded as the subject matter reliance on the information set forth therein because it is freely possible to display it, so the subject matter 2 and 3 cannot be deemed to have been conducted in Korea prior to the date of the application of the instant registration of the subject matter.

(3) The instant registered device cannot be deemed to have been publicly announced due to the difference between the comparable device and the technical composition.

(A) The characteristics of the instant registered appeal are as follows: (a) first, it is limited to the extent that it is impossible to see the inside in the center of the front body of the ice body; (b) it is made to reduce the adjustment error by forming the snow-free scambling with the inside side of the body of the body of the ice (Composition A); (c) it is limited to the minimum and maximum scambling to the left side of the body of the body of the ice; and (d) it is necessary to protect the inside body of the body of the ice that is combined with three Luxembourgscambling in the center of the Shcambling part of the body of the body of the ice; and (e) it is difficult to separate the body of the ice and scambling part into the inside part of the body of the body of the ice; and (e) it is not possible to promote the technical composition of each body of the above ice and scambling part of the body of the body of the ice.

(B) However, the comparison design 1 does not appear in the composition C and Composition D of the registered device of this case. The comparison design 2 does not appear in the composition A of the registered device of this case, and there is a problem requiring separate work, such as displaying snow booms in the color with respect to composition B. In relation to composition C, the registered device of this case is composed of at least and maximum blicks on the end part of the original blick body of the comparison design of this case, and it is composed of at least and small blicks separate from 2 of the comparison design of this case. Thus, there is a narrow gap between it and the narrow gap between it and the small blicks, which make it located in the narrow gap between the minimum and maximum licks, which makes it difficult to perform the functions of the comparison design of this case by combining body and licks with the body body of this case within a narrow range, and it is hard to see the composition of the comparison design of this case 3 D and its related effects.

(C) The four distinctive compositions in the instant registered appeal do not mutually independent, but have the rise effect of the reduction of the number of parts and the reduction of the fair time, and there is no comparable device equipped with the four distinctive compositions in the instant registered appeal, and in particular, there is no technology in relation to the structure where Luxembourg and the Luxembourg, which are the combined means of the instant registered appeal, are assigned to each other, cannot be seen as having been compared to the comparative appeal. Thus, the instant registered appeal cannot be deemed to have been announced by the comparative appeal.

(4) The challenged device contains all the components of the instant registered device.

(A) Compared with the registered device of this case, when comparing the challenged design of this case, it is necessary to form a refrigeral department A (the composition of the registered device of this case) so that the inner body of ice is not able to see the inner body center of the body of ices, and the bottom side of the body is formed (confrigerent B), the minimum and maximum clicking body is formed (confrative C) in the part of the snow-prohibited dracked dracks, and then, at the center, three Luxembourg and three Luxembourg dracks are placed (confrickD). Accordingly, all the composition of the registered device of this case is realized.

(B) With respect to the combination of Daice and other Doice cases, the registered device of this case needs to be added to the original home and the original body body, and the device subject to confirmation includes Daice body’s combination of Doice body body, and there is a difference in both devices in that it is formed on six Dowards corresponding to Luxembourg and power dye within the registered device of this case. However, the original home or the original body dye within the registered device of this case is indicated on the premise of claims, and it cannot be deemed as a distinctive component within the registered device of this case. Since the registered device of this case is merely a part of the registered device of this case, it cannot be said that there is a difference in both devices on the basis of the existence of such composition, and since the registered device of this case is merely a part of the registered device of this case, the new body dye and the body of Doium in this case can be seen as a part of the registered device of this case, which is not a part of the registered device of this case, and its design and its function can be identified within the registered device of this case.

(C) With respect to the method of re-regulation of the body body fice, there are some differences in the location or form of installation in the minimum and maximum angle of the registered body of this case and the contact-to-face donation within the challenged body of this case. However, this is only an external difference, and the minimum and maximum angled donations (or contact-to-face donations) are made in the same technical offender.

3. Determination

A. Whether the petition for confirmation falls under the scope of the right to the registered petition of this case

(1) Interpretation of the scope of rights to the instant petition for registration

The defendant asserts that in the case of son's son's sson's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's 17's son's son'

However, the claim within the scope of a request for registration of a utility model shall be described only with the matters which are indispensable for the composition of the device (Article 8(4)3 of the former Utility Model Act (amended by Act No. 4596, Dec. 10, 1993; hereinafter the same). Whether or not certain matters which are indispensable for the composition of the device should be described within the scope of a request for registration is left to the freedom of applicants. An applicant may make an increase, decrease, or change the scope of a request for registration within the scope of the matters described in the specification or drawing accompanying the initial application before a certified copy of the decision of public notice of application is served after delivery of a certified copy of the decision of public notice of application, but it is not permitted to expand the scope of the request for registration after delivery of a certified copy of the decision of public notice of application (Article 11 of the former Utility Model Act, Article 47 through 50 of the former Patent Act (amended by Act No. 4594, Dec. 10, 1993).

Therefore, the term "original home (17) stated in the claims of the instant petition for registration is one of the essential components of the instant petition for registration without any need to consider whether it is indicated in the premise or characteristic part of the claims, whether it is important within the instant petition for registration, and whether it is easy to omit it. Thus, under such premise, the instant petition for registration and the instant petition for confirmation should be prepared.

(2) Preparation for composition

(1) Since at least 10 studios (6) and original home (17) are installed on the top of 10 studios (15) which are composed of at least 10 studios (10 studios) and 10 studios (12) which are composed of at least 10 studios (10 studios) and which are composed of at least 10 studios (10 studios) with 3 studios (10 studios) which are composed of at least 10 studios (10 studios) which are composed of 10 studios and 10 studios (10 studios) which are composed of at least 10 studios (10 studios) which are composed of 10 studios and 10 studios in front.

② The composition of both devices is identical in that the body of transparent fingers (1) combined with triium showers (6) and triium showers (17) in the front center inside and outside of the front center is compared to the formation of the trigrams (3'') main body of the front center of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body of the main body.

(3) The phrase “contestine 11” on the west side of the registered height of this case is installed with at least and maximum angle (13,14) on the side of the center (16) and at the bottom of the center (13, 14). The phrase “contestine turbine turbine turbine turbine turbine turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical turgical 10thal tal tal.

4) Since the phrase "the front body of this case" is installed in 3 ice 2 around the top body of this case (7) and 3 Luxembourgs (8) in its original form (4) combined with 3 ice 10 ice 1, the combined 4 ice 5 ice 1 and 3 ice 5 ice 4 ice 5 ice 1, it is hard to see that the combined 5 ice 5 ice 1 and the combined 4 ice 5 ice 5 ice 1, the combined 10 ice 1,000 ice 1,000 ice 4,000,00000 and the combined 5 ice 1,000 ice 4,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,00).

(iii)Preparation for operational effects;

As seen earlier, the instant device has the same constituent elements as 2,3, and 4, and there are also the remaining constituent elements with the exception of 'original home (17)' among the constituent elements 1. The two devices can be verified through a transparent body (1) combined with snow plates (4; hereinafter the same shall apply) directly printed on the front of typhs (type 15; hereinafter the same shall apply) ; 3, 1, 5, 1, 5, 1, 5, 1, 5, 1, 5, 1, 5, 1, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1, 1, 5, 1, 5, 1, 5, 1, 1,5, 1, 1, 3, , 5, 1, , 5, o, o (1, o, o, o, o, o (1).

However, the registered device of this case, however, has the effect of reducing the hours of assembly when knife body (1) is assembled into knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif

(4) A summary of the result of preparation

Therefore, the registered complaint of this case and the complaint subject to confirmation are different in terms of existence of "original home (17)" in the composition, and there are differences in the effect of action. Accordingly, the complaint subject to confirmation does not belong to the scope of rights of the registered complaint of this case.

B. Sub-committee

As seen above, the complaint subject to confirmation is different from the registered complaint of this case and its composition and action effect, and it does not belong to the scope of the right. As to the remaining arguments of the plaintiff and the defendant, the decision of this case is unlawful unless it is necessary to review the remaining arguments of the plaintiff and the defendant.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim seeking the revocation of the trial decision of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices.

Judges Park Dong-dong (Presiding Judge)