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 (No. 2) 1)/ Date of application / Date of registration: The name of a product on December 31, 2003 / December 31, 2003 / 204: the name of a product: the fixed Ban drawings : [a] / Other drawings, and a description of the design (attached Form 1): / [a] 4] other drawings, and a description of the design (attached Form 1).

B. 1) Prior Designs 1) Registration number 1 (A) of prior designs / Date of application / Registration / Publication: The name of the device on July 27, 20198/ July 27, 2002 / October 19, 2002 / 2002: prefabricated-type drawings: as shown in attached Table 2.

2) Registration number 2 (A) (No. 4) / filing date / Registration publication date: The name of a good on May 23, 2003// May 23, 2003/ June 7, 2003: a fence C) drawings, and a description of a design: as shown in attached Table 2.

3) Registration number 3 (A)(5)(A)/filing date/registration publication date: The name of a product on September 1, 1997, No. 228233/ 228233//Sgd. 11, 1997/ Nov. 16, 1998: Drawings for mersh fences: as shown in attached Form 2(C).

C. On December 11, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a petition for a trial for invalidation of the registration against the Defendant with the Intellectual Property Tribunal on December 11, 2017, on the ground that “the registered design of this case is identical or closely related to the goods subject to prior designs, and the registered design of this case can be easily created through the combination of prior designs 1 and 2, or the combination of prior designs 1 and 3, the laws applied as of the filing date of the registered design of this case under the former Design Act are the former Design Act (amended by Act No. 7289, Dec. 31, 2004; hereinafter “former Design Act”) and the registration should be invalidated as it falls under Article 5(2) of the former Design Act (amended by Act No. 7289, Mar. 9, 2018).