1. The supplementary intervenor's participation shall be permitted.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 7, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that “newness is denied by prior inventions 1-1 prior to the correction of the instant patent invention, claims 1 through 7, 12, 13, and 19 prior to the correction of the instant patent invention, and the nonobviousness of claims 1 through 19 prior to the correction of the instant patent invention is denied by prior inventions, and the instant patent invention shall be invalidated on the grounds that the lack of specification exists.”

(2) On the other hand, on May 7, 2014, the Defendant rendered a request for correction to correct claims 1, 5-13, and 15-19 of the instant patent invention during the aforementioned invalidation trial procedure. (2) The Intellectual Property Tribunal recognized that the said request for correction was lawful on June 10, 2015, and rendered the instant trial ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request for invalidation trial.

On July 16, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant trial decision.

3) On November 11, 2015, the Defendant filed a petition for correction trial with the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board for the deletion of claims 8 through 11, and 15 through 18 of the instant patented invention. The Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board rendered a trial ruling accepting the entire amendment on January 12, 2016, and the said trial ruling became final and conclusive. 4) On August 23, 2016, the Defendant filed a petition for correction trial with the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board for an additional limitation on the composition of claims 1,5,6,7, 12, and 19 of the instant patented invention, which became final and conclusive as the corrective trial ruling in the instant case No. 2015, supra, as the Patent Tribunal No. 2016No. 95, supra. 2016.

On March 21, 2017, the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board rendered a decision of correction to accept the decision, and the said decision of correction became final and conclusive.

B. The title of the patented invention of this case (No. 69) 1: D. 2) domestic application date / international filing date / priority date.