1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. (1) On March 27, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant in the Intellectual Property Tribunal for the trial of this case against the following purport: “The claim 1, 11 through 16, 21 through 23, 25 through 30 of the instant patent invention was submitted to the person having ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains (hereinafter “ordinary technician”) at the trial stage of the instant patent invention 1 and 2, respectively, to comparable invention 1 and 2. The nonobviousness is denied, as it may be easily claimed by combining widely known and widely known technologies, and is not supported by the detailed description of the invention, and the detailed description of the invention is not stated to the extent that the ordinary technician could easily implement the patented invention.” The Plaintiff filed for a trial of invalidation of the instant patent invention against claims 1, 11 through 16, 21 through 23, 25 through 30 of the instant patent invention.”

(2) On September 21, 2015, the defendant at the above invalidation trial procedure:

B. As stated in paragraph (3), the correction request for correction of the claims of the instant patent invention (hereinafter “instant correction request”) was made.

(3) On August 23, 2017, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal recognized correction under the instant request for correction on the ground that “the instant request for correction is lawful and deleted due to the correction, and claims 11, 12, 13 through 16, 22, 23, 25, and 30 other than claims 1, 21, 21, 13 through 16, 22, 23, 25, and 30 other than claims 1, 21, 200 are not denied even if prior inventions 1, 2, etc. are based on prior inventions 1, 2, etc., and the nonobviousness of the invention is not denied, as detailed description of the invention is stated to the extent that ordinary technicians can easily perform the correction, and the requirements for the specification are also satisfied.” The instant request for adjudication on the corrected claims 11, 12, and 21, the remainder claims 1, 13 through 16, 222, 23, 2

B. The name of the Defendant’s patented invention of this case (Evidence A) (1): DP-IV control type (2) international filing date/international filing date.