1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on January 27, 2016 (Revocation Judgment) No. 161 shall be revoked;

2...

1. Basic facts

A. On February 11, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants on February 11, 2014 against the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board for the invalidation trial against the instant Claim Nos. 1 through 9 on the ground that “the instant patent invention may be easily made by a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains (hereinafter “ordinary technician”) from 1 and 2.” On November 26, 2015, the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board rendered a trial ruling citing the Plaintiff’s request for invalidation trial on February 16, 2015 on the ground that “the nonobviousness of the instant patent invention is denied by prior inventions 1 and 2.” Accordingly, the Defendants brought a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the said trial ruling under the Patent Court No. 2015Hu1843, Mar. 17, 2015, the Patent Court rendered a final judgment on March 26, 2015 that “the instant patent invention could not be denied by the person with ordinary skill.”

3) After January 27, 2016, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered the instant trial ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request for invalidation trial as stated in paragraph (1) (B) of the instant patent invention on the same ground as the previous invention 1 and 2, on the ground that the instant patent invention was not non-obviousness by the previous invention 1 and 2, since there was no new assertion and evidence submitted by the parties from the time the revocation ruling mentioned in paragraph (2) became final and conclusive, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered the instant trial ruling dismissing the request for invalidation trial as stated in paragraph (1) (B) of the instant patent invention. (1) The name of the instant patent invention (Evidence 1 and 2 evidence 1): C2) filing date/registration date/registration number: D/F3: The Defendants were entitled to the Defendant’s claim 1’s refrigering tank and refrigering the refrigering to recover the refrigering to the first refrigering system connected with the refrigering sheet.