logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017.05.11 2014후1631
등록무효(특)
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

Costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the selective invention refers to an invention in which the elements of the preceding or publicly notified invention are stated as an upper concept, and only the subordinate concepts included in the above upper concept are all or part of the components.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2012Hu3664 Decided May 16, 2014, etc.). The lower court determined that the part of the instant patent invention (patent registration number No. 677804)(patent registration number No. 67804)(hereinafter “instant Claim No. 2”) under Article 2(2)(hereinafter “instant Claim No. 2”) of the patent invention(patent No. 2013No. 2013 Decided December 20, 2013, corrected by a trial decision of the Intellectual Property Tribunal (Patent No. 67804) with the name “a liquid indication device” is indicated in the comparable invention 5 as indicated in the lower judgment, and that the composition 1 and 3 of the instant patent invention is indicated in the comparison invention 5 as well as that of the remainder in the same manner as the cited invention 5.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on the inventive step

2. In order for the plaintiffs to not deny the inventive step of selective invention as to the ground of appeal No. 2, all subordinate concepts included in selective invention have different effects from that of the preceding invention in quality, or there is a significant difference in quantity, even if there is no qualitative difference.

At this time, it is clear that the detailed description of the selective invention has the same effect as above compared to the prior invention.

arrow