1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The date of application of the registered design of this case (No. 2)/ the date of registration/registration number: C/D/E 2: The name of the product: F3: drawings (attached Form 1); 4. The owner of the design right: the Defendants

(b) The name of the product: F2) drawings: as shown in [Attachment 2].

C. (1) On July 16, 2016, the Defendants filed a petition against the Plaintiff for the trial to confirm the scope of active right by asserting that “the design subject to confirmation is similar to the registered design of this case, and thus falls under the scope of the registered design of this case.” (2) On June 29, 2017, the Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered the instant trial decision citing the Defendants’ above affirmative claim to confirm the scope of right to the registered design of this case on the ground that “the design subject to confirmation is very similar to the registered design of this case, as the overall eficiencies, and thus, falls under the scope of the registered design of this case.”

[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 2-1, and 2-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The design subject to confirmation appears in the shape of “v”, where the Fagrgr is cut off in the shape of “v” and the part of “fagrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgr.