1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) On September 5, 2013, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office: (a) on September 5, 2013, the claim 1 through 5 (hereinafter referred to as “claim 1 of this case”; and (b) on September 5, 2013, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office has ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains (hereinafter referred to as “ordinary technician”).

(2) On November 5, 2013, the Plaintiffs amended the instant patent application invention on the grounds that the nonobviousness of the instant patent application on January 29, 2014 was denied due to the lack of inventive step, and thus, notified the grounds for rejection that the patent cannot be granted pursuant to Article 29(2) of the Patent Act. (2) The Plaintiffs issued a decision of rejection on the grounds that the said amendment was rejected on January 29, 2014.

3) On February 28, 2014, the Plaintiffs amended the scope of claims upon filing a request for reexamination, and the Korean Intellectual Property Office examiner notified the grounds for rejection that the nonobviousness is denied by prior inventions 1 or 3 on March 28, 2014. (4) The Plaintiffs re-amended the instant patent application invention on May 20, 2014, but the Korean Intellectual Property Office examiner maintained the decision of rejection on the ground that the said amendment did not resolve the grounds for rejection that the nonobviousness of the instant patent application invention is denied by the foregoing grounds for rejection.

5) On October 27, 2014, the Plaintiffs filed a petition for a trial on an appeal against rejection seeking revocation of the said decision with the Intellectual Property Tribunal, and the Intellectual Property Tribunal deliberated the said case as 2014 won and 6683. On May 29, 2015, the Patent Tribunal rendered the instant trial ruling dismissing the said claim on the ground that the nonobviousness of the instant Claim No. 1 is denied by prior inventions 1 through 3, 2015, and the said decision of rejection is lawful. (b) The Plaintiffs’ title of the instant Claim No. 2 (Evidence 2) invention (Evidence 1): C2); the filing date/application number: D/ E3; and the summary of the instant Claim No. 1 is heating and cooling.