The case holding that there is no non-obviousness since the patent application invention with respect to tape sets could easily be made by the cited proposal.

The case holding that there is no non-obviousness since the patent application invention with respect to tape sets could easily be made by the cited proposal.

Article 6 of the former Patent Act

[Defendant-Appellant] Seoul High Court Decision 200Na15888 decided May 1, 200

The Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office

Korean Intellectual Property Office Decision 88Hun-won 541 dated July 31, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the applicant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the original decision, the court below held that the original invention of this case covers the front side of the Karate case and the tape, which are recommended by both sides of the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and right and right and the right and right and the right and right and the right and right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right are exercised.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yoon So-young (Presiding Justice)