logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.02.13 2013가합7771
특허침해금지 등
Text

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

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s patent right is the patent holder with respect to the following patented inventions (hereinafter “instant patented inventions”) called “heat preserving preserving preserving preserving preserving pent,” and each claim (hereinafter “instant Claim”).

Patent registration number: The filing date of No. 1103188 / the priority claim date / the registration date: May 9, 2008 / The claim and main drawings on December 29, 201: Attached Table 2.

B. The Defendant Korea Call Mary Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Call horse”), including the production of the Defendants’ products, sold the products to consumers under the name “Miririr Eye Eyivator,” such as a photograph of the attached list 1 produced by the Defendant Barun Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Barun”) at the request of the Khyun, Inc. (hereinafter “Miryun”) and a photograph of the attached list 1 produced by Defendant Barun Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Barun”), and the products manufactured by Defendant Barun, were supplied to the Khyun’s Kyun.

다. 비교대상발명 1) 비교대상발명 1은 2006. 12. 11. 공고된 대한민국 등록실용신안공보 제433606호에 게재된 ‘튜브형 화장품 용기의 노즐팁’에 관한 것으로서, 주요 내용 및 도면은 별지3의 제1항과 같다. 2) 비교대상발명 2는 1998. 10. 15. 공개된 대한민국 공개실용신안공보 실1998-56332호에 게재된 ‘이온 펄스기’에 관한 것으로서, 주요 내용 및 도면은 별지3의 제2항과 같다. 라.

(1) On November 28, 2012, the Patent Tribunal filed a petition for trial to invalidate the instant patent invention under Article 2012Da2848 of the Patent Tribunal. On April 22, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a request for correction to correct the detailed description of the instant patent invention. (2) The Patent Tribunal rendered a trial decision on December 6, 2013 that received the Plaintiff’s request for correction and dismissed the Defendant’s request for correction. However, on August 28, 2014, the Patent Court did not accept the Plaintiff’s request for correction and made a decision to dismiss the Defendant’s request for adjudication.

arrow