The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding the parts of four to sixteen as follows, and thus, it is citing this case by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In order for an invention to be deemed to fall under the scope of the right of a patented invention, the legal doctrine on the premise of whether the part used in the patented invention constitutes an equal infringement (A) must include an organic combined relationship between each of the elements and the elements of the patented invention as it is in comparison with the patented invention in order to be deemed to fall under the scope of the right of the patented invention, and even if the elements are exchanged or changed in the compared invention, the solution principle for the task is the same in both inventions, even if they are exchanged, they can achieve the same purpose in the patented invention, have the same effect as that in the patented invention, and have the same effect as that in the art to which the invention pertains, and if it is so obvious that a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains can easily consider, from the technology already known or publicly known at the time of the application for the patented invention, is deemed to fall under the scope of the right to the patented invention (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 205Da209420, supra.).