1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) developed a cymia zoleideideideide (hereinafter “D”) whose principal ingredient is Simias, and completed the patent registration by filing an application for a patent for the EF (hereinafter “instant patented invention”) in order to improve the method of using the crymia zole’s main ingredient by adding D’s chemical feed to the cymia stuff, and began to manufacture and sell the cymia esticideide (hereinafter “G”) from January 206 according to the instant patented invention.

B. The plaintiff, who is the two-wing business operator, was from January 2007 to the same year.

2. Until the end, the Defendant Company filed a lawsuit against the Defendant Company seeking compensation for damages due to defective manufacturing or design defects and display defects of “G” (hereinafter “instant prior lawsuit”) by the Chuncheon District Court 2008Kadan1975, asserting that the altered bees that he/she wired by using “G” incurred damages, such as the abolition of death.

C. Defendant B, a full-time researcher of the Korea Institute for Agricultural Bio-resources at H University, a national university, was entrusted with appraisal by the court of first instance in the instant preceding lawsuit, and was conducted on September 30, 2009 through October 22, 2009, by dividing approximately 500 bees into five salary groups, and divided into five salary groups.

As of November 9, 2009, Defendant B submitted a report on the execution and investigation of appraiser experiments to the court of first instance (hereinafter “instant appraisal report”). The main contents of the instant appraisal report are as follows.

1. Testing method (asy as) D M G K (asy as);

2. Contents and methods of the survey (in the middle) G (in the middle) G (in the middle) G (in the middle) G (in the middle) G (in the middle) G; and

E. In the preceding lawsuit of this case, the court of first instance confirmed that there was no risk that the Director of the National Institute of Animal Science and Quarantine would cause damage to D to 'D' as raw materials of 'G', and thus granted permission to manufacture animal drugs.