All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A infringed on the right to de facto draft of the Company D (hereinafter “D”) (hereinafter “H”) by the beta of the complainant Company A (hereinafter “Defendant”)

As the defendant believed, there was no perception that there was a false fact, or that there was no perception that the defendant interfered with the business through fraudulent means.

B. Defendant B (Defendant B) The Defendant infringed on H B’s right to know that H bell violated D’s right to know

As the defendant believed, there was no perception that there was a false fact, or that there was no perception that the defendant interfered with the business through fraudulent means.

2) The Defendant merely indicated his opinion or value judgment that Hbes infringed upon D’s right to use a new design, but did not indicate any fact that may impair H’s honor.

2. Determination

A. H infringed upon D’s right to use a new design

1) The Defendants believed that the right of use was infringed on since they received advice from patent attorneys and attorneys that the right of use was infringed upon at the time they filed a lawsuit against D's claim against D' to prohibit the infringement of a utility model right (C'2013 Gohap63047).

The assertion argues that there was a reasonable ground to believe that there was a reasonable ground.

2) The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the first instance court’s evidence duly admitted and examined: (i) D filed a lawsuit against H on August 19, 2013, which infringed on the right to use a new design; (ii) H submitted a written reply and a prepared document to the effect that there was no infringement on the right to use a new design; and (iii) D voluntarily withdrawn the prohibition of infringement on the right to use a utility model and the claim for damages on March 21, 2014; and (ii) Supreme Court Decision 2009Do49 Decided October 28, 2010, which the Defendants invoked, infringed the patent right at an objective point of view.

While there are reasonable grounds to believe, this case has filed a lawsuit claiming the prohibition of infringement on the right to use a new design without reasonable grounds.