2021Da217011 Action for the prohibition of patent infringement, etc.

Golf Respect Co., Ltd.

Law Firm LLC et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Kakio EXE

Attorney Jeong-soo et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Patent Court Decision 2019Na1906 decided January 15, 2021

on June 30, 2021

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Patent Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The scope of protection of a patented invention shall be determined by the descriptions of the claims (Article 97 of the Patent Act): Provided, That the technical meaning of the claims must be accurately understood, taking into account the description, drawings, etc. of the invention into account. As such, the matters described in the claims shall be based on the general meaning of the relevant text, and shall be objectively and rationally interpreted after considering the technical significance of the claims to be expressed in the said text, taking into account the description, drawings, etc. of the invention. However, even when considering the description, drawings, etc. of the invention, it is not permissible to limit, expand, or interpret the claims in accordance with other descriptions, such as the description, drawings, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2011Hu3230, Dec. 27, 2012; 2019Da22782, 222799, Oct. 17, 2019).

Meanwhile, in order to ensure that a product manufactured by the other party to a patent infringement lawsuit or a method of use (hereinafter referred to as “infringed product, etc.”) infringes on the patent right of the patented invention, an organic combined relationship between each element and its component, as stated in the scope of the patent claim, should be included in the infringing product, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da65818, Sept. 29, 201).

2. We examine these legal principles and records.

A. Paragraph 1 of the claim scope of the patented invention (patent number omitted) of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "Paragraph 1 of this case") is "a virtual golf operation device and method providing a correction of the name "non-distance reduction rate" (hereinafter referred to as the "paragraph 1 of this case") is an invention concerning the virtual golf operation device, which is premised on the display in the string in which the patent invention of this case (patent number omitted) is divided into the area of Pawe and the area of Paweg, and is included in "a control part adjusting the distance according to the traging condition" (hereinafter referred to as the "cat condition") as an element of "a control part adjusting the non-distance according to the traging condition" (hereinafter referred to as the "catch condition").

B. According to the description of the invention related to the patented invention of this case, if the distance adjustment is made in consideration of the topographical conditions only in light of the locational conditions in the virtual golf structure that is premised on the display in the swewa and the sweb, without considering the sweaking condition, the results of the sweaking would bring about a big difference with the actual ones. In order to solve these problems, the patented invention of this case is an invention that has adopted a non-sweaking composition in consideration of the topographical conditions and the sweaking conditions. In other words, the 4 elements of the Claim 1 of this case are not considered only for topographical conditions but also for the improvement of the accuracy of the results of the sweaking operation.

C. Meanwhile, the instant Claim 1 invention does not limit the specific method of adjusting the distance in accordance with the topographical conditions and the terms of sheet, and does not define or limit the meaning of “a non-distance adjustment in accordance with the topographical conditions and the terms of sheet” in the description of the instant patent invention. Therefore, if a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains (hereinafter referred to as “ordinary technician”) is able to present within the scope of not deviating from the technical significance of the invention, it may be included in the non-distance adjustment method of the instant Claim 1 invention insofar as it considers both topographical conditions and sheet conditions.

In particular, the description of the invention of this case presents an example of "a method that reduces the range of distance in accordance with the topographical conditions in the case of lowering the range of distance in the field of sheeting," in which "a method that reduces the range of distance in accordance with the topographical conditions," and in the case of lowering the range of distance in the field of sheeting the same condition as the topographical conditions, a method that reduces the range of distance in the result of the Formula 1 by reducing the range of distance." In the case of a normal engineer, the above explanation can be seen as including a method that calculates the appropriate range of distance reduction according to the topographical conditions and the combination of the terms and conditions of sheet or does not apply the appropriate range of distance reduction or the range of distance reduction. In the case of a normal engineer, the method of adjusting the distance of distance, i.e., the method of calculating the values established in advance in accordance with the terms and conditions of sheeting, which does not necessarily include the stage of calculating the rate of distance reduction and the adjusted rate in accordance with the topographical conditions.

D. In addition, Paragraph 1 invention of this case does not limit the possibility of shooting under all the terms and conditions, and in light of the fact that the explanation of the invention of this case does not include a display in the art area the same as the topographical conditions of which are identical to that of the topographical conditions, if there is a certain limitation in the string area in accordance with topographical conditions, even if there is a certain limitation in the string area in accordance with the topographical conditions, it can be deemed that the non-distance adjustment method of the Claim 1 invention of this case constitutes a non-distance adjustment method in consideration of the topographical conditions and the string conditions within the string area.

E. The Defendant’s products, as indicated in the holding of the court below, also include the composition of adjusting the distance in a way that does not apply a non-distance reduction rate according to the topographical conditions in the case where the Defendant’s products are shocked in a virtual golf typer device, a virtual golf course, a reduction of the topographical conditions, and a reduction of the non-distance reduction rate in accordance with the reduced topographical conditions in the case where the Defendant’s products are shocked in the field of pets (However, in the area of each set which is less unfavorable than the topographical conditions or in the area of this species, it is impossible to shoot in the area of each set or in this case), and the composition is the same as the instant Claim 1 invention.

F. Ultimately, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant’s products as indicated in the holding of the lower court constituted an infringement on the instant Claim 1’s invention, since they also include an organic combination between each element of the instant Claim 1 and each element, taking into account the topographical conditions and specifications.

3. Nevertheless, the court below interpreted the component 4 as "a composition to adjust a non-distance reduction rate established by the method of calculating a non-distance reduction rate established in accordance with the terms and conditions of each sheet," and held that the Defendant’s implementation product does not have a composition to adjust a non-distance reduction rate established in accordance with the topographical conditions by revising the rate of non-distance reduction rate established in advance in accordance with the terms and conditions of each sheet to the corrected value established in advance in accordance with the terms and conditions of each sheet, and determined that the Defendant’s implementation product does not infringe on the invention of this case. In so determining, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the interpretation of claims, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment, and the ground of appeal pointing this out is with merit.

4. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Jae-hyung

Justices Ansan-chul

Justices Noh Jeong-hee

Justices Lee Dong-gu