The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In order for an invention to be confirmed compared to a patented invention to be within the scope of the right of the patented invention, an organic combination relationship between each constituent element and its component stated in the scope of the patent right of the patented invention shall be included in the invention subject to confirmation

Even in cases where there are changes in the composition of the patent claim of the invention subject to confirmation, the patented invention and the task solution principle are the same, the patented invention show the same effect as the patented invention, and if there is a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains (hereinafter referred to as "ordinary technician") can easily consider, barring special circumstances, the invention subject to confirmation is equivalent to the composition stated in the patent claim of the patented invention and still falls under the scope of the patent right of the patented invention.

When determining whether "the solution principle is the same" of the invention subject to confirmation and the patented invention, part of the composition stated in the claim does not formally extract from the scope of the claim, but in comparison with the prior art, considering the detailed description of the invention mentioned in the specification and the prior art at the time of the application, it is necessary to investigate and determine substantially what is the core of the professional engineer who is based on the special solution method in the patented invention.

(see Supreme Court Decision 2012Hu1132, Jul. 24, 2014). The substantial value of a patented invention to be protected by the Patent Act contributes to technological development by resolving a patented invention’s patented invention’s technological task that has not been resolved in the prior art. As such, the determination of whether the modified element of the invention subject to confirmation is equal to the elements corresponding to the patented invention should take into account the principle of resolving the unique task to the patented invention.

In addition, the solution principle for the patented invention is applied.