beta
Text
1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on November 19, 2015 on a case No. 2015Da3316 shall be revoked.
2. The total cost of the lawsuit.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendants’ registered design (1)/date of application/date of registration: The name of the goods registered D/ E/F (2): drawings (attached Form 1).
(b) The name of the product subject to confirmation (1): G (2) drawings: as shown in attached Form 2;
C. (1) The number of prior designs 1 (a) and the filing date/registration date: The name of the good on February 27, 1998/ February 18, 1998: the drawing of poppy valves (c) (attached Form 3).
same as paragraph (1).
(2) A registration number 2 (a) of a prior design / filing date / Date of registration: The name of the product on May 13, 1998/ May 22, 1998: A drawing of poppy valves (c) (attached Form 3) (b) of a prior design:
(d) same as paragraph (1);
Preliminary Design (Evidence A) (1): The publication date of the Utility Model Gazette (No. 2000-00002396) (2) disclosed to the Korean Intellectual Property Office of the Republic of Korea: February 7, 2000: The drawing of the stoppy valve (4): attached Form 4.
E. (1) On May 27, 2015, the Defendants asserted against the Plaintiff that “The design subject to confirmation and the registered design of this case are identical or similar to each other, so the design subject to confirmation falls under the scope of the right of the registered design of this case,” and claimed active confirmation of the scope of right (2015Da3316) seeking confirmation.
(2) On November 19, 2015, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered the instant trial ruling citing the Defendants’ request on the grounds that “the design subject to confirmation is not identical to the already known prior designs, but can be easily created from the prior designs. Furthermore, the design subject to confirmation is very similar to the registered design in the instant case, and thus falls under the scope of the right to the registered design in the instant case.”
(3) The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the instant court seeking the revocation of the instant trial decision, and the instant court issued 2015Heo8240.