The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 19, 2017, the Defendant asserted that “the instant patent invention” (hereinafter “instant patent invention”) of the Plaintiff on September 19, 2017 includes ① prior inventions 1, 2,5-8, which a person with ordinary knowledge in the relevant technical field (hereinafter “ordinary engineer”) deemed subsequent to the cited inventions. As such, non-obviousness is denied, registration should be invalidated pursuant to Article 29(2) of the Patent Act, and the registration should be invalidated pursuant to Article 42(3)1 and 42(4)1 and 2 of the Patent Act on the ground that the lack of description is erroneous, and thus, the Intellectual Property Tribunal requested a trial for invalidation of registration. 2) The Intellectual Property Tribunal deliberated on the Plaintiff’s patent invention under Article 2017Da2978, and on June 14, 2018, the remainder of the instant patent invention should be deemed to be invalid by the Defendant’s trial ruling on the invalidation of the patent invention without prejudice.

3) The Plaintiff dissatisfied with this and filed the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant trial decision. (b) The title of the instant patent invention (Evidence 2) invention: C2) filing date/registration date/registration number: D/E/Patent F3: the right holder: Plaintiff 4) The claim 【 Claim 1’s inserting into one connection group among the two connectors of the electronic stability devices 1’s claim 1’s claim 1’s inserting into one connection group, 3-pampers and 4-pampers with one electric gap, which is once installed in one electric gap among the two connectors of the power source, and the part emphasizing for the convenience of understanding the part 4-pampers of the power source.

(hereinafter the same shall apply);

The effects of the electric guidance.