1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant’s trial decision on July 8, 2015 (hereinafter “instant patent invention”) No. 64920 of the Patent Act (hereinafter “instant patent invention”).

(2) On October 29, 2015, the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board filed a motion against the Plaintiff, a patentee, to confirm the scope of the right of the instant patent invention. (2) The Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board rendered the instant trial ruling accepting the said request for a trial on the ground that the challenged invention does not fall under the scope of the right because it has different effects from the claims 1 (hereinafter “instant Claim 1”) through 9 of the instant patent invention, and its composition and effects are different.

B. The title of the invention of this case (Evidence 3) 1: the filing date/registration date/registration number of gold-type equipment 2 for the launching type : on March 24, 2005 / November 3, 2006, patentee: Plaintiff 4) claims / her claim / her claim / [ Claim 1] her length-type and her length-type and her length-type and her length-type were written to form Capital in order to contain capital materials fixed at the launch type / her length-type and her length-type and her length-type were written to form the above Capital, so that the above her length-type and her length-type can be moved before and after the opening and closing of the capital, including the gold-type type in the gold-type equipment installed at the front-type type her length-type, but the middle-type and her thickness were written to be separated from the upper-type and the middle-type-type gold-type (hereinafter referred to as “the above double-type-type capital-type”).