1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant’s registered design 1) registration number / filing date / registration date: The name of the product C/D/E 2: F3: B. Design relating to “F” implemented by the Plaintiff is as specified in attached Table 1. (c) The drawings are as specified in attached Table 2. C. The Defendant filed a claim against the Plaintiff on December 21, 2017 against the Intellectual Property Tribunal for a trial to confirm the scope of right (2017Da3996) by asserting that “the design subject to confirmation is the same as the registered design of this case, and falls under the scope of the right.”

2) On October 22, 2018, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered the instant trial ruling accepting the said request on the grounds that “the design subject to confirmation is identical with the registered design of the instant case and falls under the scope of the right to the registered design of the instant case, given that the design subject to confirmation is identical with the overall aesthetic sense with the registered design of the instant case and does not fall under the scope of the right to the registered design.

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the challenged design constitutes a free-working design that can be easily implemented by means of prior designs 1 or by combining prior designs 2 through 5, and thus, the trial decision of this case, which was otherwise decided by the Plaintiff, should be revoked in an unlawful manner without comparison with the registered design of this case, although it falls under the scope of the registered design of this case. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this.

3. The plaintiff's claim seeking the revocation of the trial decision of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.