1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company running the business of manufacturing industrial plastic products, etc., and is the design right of the registered design as follows (hereinafter “instant registered design”). The Plaintiff is the design right of the instant registered design (hereinafter “instant design right”).

1) Registration number / filing date / registration date: The first instance judgment contains the registration number of the registered design of this case in F, but in light of the design right-holder, drawings, etc. identified by the description and image of the evidence No. 3, this appears to be I’s clerical error. / The name of the article D/E2: The name of the article: the 3 major drawing of the document in which the preserving preserving stip is set by the surface map.

B. Around October 19, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract on the development and manufacture of the emul balance sheet form with the Defendant who is engaged in the business of development and manufacturing of gold-type.

C. Around June 2016, the Defendant manufactured the metal form for the production of the spet disc (hereinafter “the gold type”) and sold it to Nonparty Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), and around that time, G sold the spets in the attached form and the spets in the attached form manufactured using the gold type (hereinafter “the spets in this case”). From that time, G sold the spets in the attached form and the spets in the attached form.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, 5, 7 evidence, Eul evidence 1 through 5 (including additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) or images, the result of the examination by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. On the grounds delineated below, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion infringed on the Plaintiff’s design right. As such, the Plaintiff sought payment of damages KRW 275,00,000, and damages for delay incurred by the Plaintiff’s infringement of the Defendant’s design right.

1) The Defendant sold the instant gold mold, which is identical to the instant registered design, and similar to the instant registered design, to G, and thereby indirectly infringed on the Plaintiff’s design right.