The judgment below is reversed, and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed.

The total costs of litigation shall be borne individually by each party.

Judgment ex officio is made.

The claim for the confirmation of the scope of a patent right is intended to determine the scope of the existing patent, so even if the patent is legally created, no profit to seek the confirmation of the scope of the patent is available after the patent has been extinguished.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Hu223, Sept. 10, 1996; 2010Hu173, Sept. 30, 2010). The instant patent invention (patent number E) became null and void on the grounds that the instant lawsuit was pending in the final appeal, and thus, the patent right became never to have existed.

Therefore, the adjudication to confirm the scope of a patent right of this case is judged as an object of a patent which remains unexistent as a result, and is unlawful, but it does not have any legal interest to seek revocation of the adjudication as a result of the extinguishment of a patent right. Thus, the lawsuit of this case

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and this case is sufficient for the Supreme Court to directly judge.

The lawsuit of this case is dismissed, and the total cost of the lawsuit is assessed against each party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.