1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

(a) The Plaintiff’s application date of the registered design (No. 1)/registration date/registration number: the name of the goods D/E/Design F (2): the description and drawings of the design G (3) (attached Form 1):

(b) The name of the product subject to confirmation (the evidence No. 5-1 to 12 (1) of the product: G (2) the description and drawings of the design: as shown in attached Form 2;

(c) Prior designs (1) 1 (No. 6, No. 4-1 to 8) (a) of prior designs: A design drawings of G (attached Form 3):

(2) Prior Design 2 (A) (No. 7) (a): A patent disclosure bulletin (USS 2010/9044 A1, disclosure date: April 15, 2010): The name of a good: A prote press map (C): d. [Attachment 4].

(1) On December 28, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a petition for trial seeking confirmation of the scope of active rights (2015Da5734) with the Intellectual Property Tribunal, asserting that “The design subject to confirmation is similar to the registered design of this case, since it falls under the scope of the registered design of this case.”

(2) On August 8, 2016, the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board dismissed the Plaintiff’s above trial decision on the ground that “The registered design of this case is not subject to the scope of the right, since the registered design of this case differs in overall depth from the registered design of this case and does not fall under the scope of the right,” due to differences between the remaining parts, i.e., the number and location of “kno”, “number of kno,” “i.e., the number of knobs,” “i., the number of knobs,” and “knobs,” and “n

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 7, Eul evidence 4 (including branch numbers in the case of supplemental evidence) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the trial decision of this case is unlawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion.