This pride (Law Firm Barun Law, Attorneys Oh Jong-soo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Kim Sea (Patent & New Law Firm, Patent Attorney Park Jong-young et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Microfrate Co., Ltd. (Law Firm Square, Attorneys O Chang-moo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

June 19, 2003

1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on December 28, 2001 on the case No. 1292 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of litigation shall be borne by the defendant, including the costs incurred by participation in the co-litigation.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the statements in Gap evidence 1 through 23 and in Eul evidence 1 through 13 and the whole purport of pleadings:

A. Patent invention of this case

(1) Name: Method of automatic conversion into Korea and Japan.

(2) Registration number: No. 123403.

(3) Date of application/registration: October 21, 1994/ September 12, 1997

(4) patentee: plaintiff

(5) Claims

Paragraph 1: 1 of this paragraph: In the case of an automatic conversion method applied to a document entry method equipped with the CPU and the Meology, at least one language is entered; the second step to separate the words above from the words above; the third step to perform the ruling of Korea and the above words as to the separated words; if the words above are determined in the Korean short language, the word shall be converted into the Korean short language; and if the words above are determined in the English short language, an investigation shall be conducted by including the fourth step to convert the words above into the English and Korean language, and if there is no investigation, the word and the survey in the English short language shall be converted into the English short language (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 1”).

Paragraph 2: In paragraph 2: In paragraph 1, the above Section 2 is a method of automatically converting the English language into the word "paragraph 2" (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 2") with the feature of including the five steps in which the word is treated as the word "the whole" and the word "the end is deemed to be an English language consistent with the survey and the word "the word "the word" is deemed to be an English language consistent with the survey.

In paragraph 3: In paragraph 1, the above-mentioned three steps are to determine the above-mentioned words in Korean if the above-mentioned separated words meet the requirements for Korean language, and to automatically convert the above words into English and English automatically (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 3”) with the characteristics of including the five steps in which the above words are determined in English if they satisfy the requirements for Korean language.

In paragraph 4: In paragraph 1, the above-mentioned three steps shall determine the above-mentioned words in Korean if the separated words meet the requirements for Korean language, and if the above-mentioned words meet the requirements for Korean language, the above-mentioned words shall be determined in English, and if the above-mentioned words meet the requirements for English language, the above-mentioned words shall be determined in English, and if the above-mentioned necessary conditions are satisfied, the above-mentioned words shall be included in the five steps determined in Korean language (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 4").

Paragraph 5: In Paragraph 4, the above-mentioned 5 is an automatic conversion method with the characteristics of including the six steps which determine that the above-mentioned language contains a complaint of the necessary English conditions if not less than 4 consecutive places in English, and that the above-mentioned language contains a six consecutive place in English (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 5").

Pursuant to Paragraph 6: In paragraph 5, the English language of the sixth step above means the English language of a, e, i, o, u, A, E, I,O, or U, excluding the English language of a, i, i, o, u, A, E, I,O, or U (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 6").

Pursuant to Paragraph 7: In paragraph 5, the English characters in the English language of the sixth phase above mean the English characters other than Y, e, i, o, u, A, E, I,O, U, and Y (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 7") with the feature of the English characters excluding y, and Y.

Paragraph 8: In paragraph 5, the examination of whether the above-mentioned requirements are satisfied or not, at the sixth stage, the English automatic conversion method (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 8") with the characteristics of including the seven steps which determine that the English language in the English language with four consecutive English characters, even though the above-mentioned four series of English characters are attached to the above-mentioned English words, shall include the seven consecutive English characters, which are considered to satisfy the necessary conditions in English (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 8").

Paragraph 9: In Paragraph 3 or 4, the conditions required for Korean translation at the fifth level above shall include the six steps that determine that the above words meet the requirements for Korean language when meeting the rules of the association and that the said rules of the association meet the requirements for Korean language, and include the six steps that determine that the said rules of the association meet the requirements for Korean language (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 9”).

Paragraph 10: In any of the events described in paragraphs 2 through 4, the above third step is to examine whether the above words meet the rules of the combination and to determine as the English language satisfactory to the rules of the combination, and to include the six steps to determine in English the above words (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 10”). The above third step is to include the six steps to determine in English the above words (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 10”).

Paragraph 11: In either of the paragraphs 2 through 4, the above three steps shall include the six steps which determine the above words in English (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 11”) and include the six steps, if any, the following three steps:

In paragraph 12: In paragraph 11, the examination of whether the key is used in any of the above 6 steps or not, shall include any of the 7 steps in which it considers unnecessary shraw is used if there are no two or more Korean sound words corresponding to key, and if it is divided into the above shraw at the time of entry into the key, the method of automatic conversion (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 12”) with the characteristics of including any of the 7 steps in which it is deemed to have been used.

Section 13: In any of the paragraphs 2 through 4 above, the first step is the sixth step executing the initialization; the seventh step in which at least one key is input; the eight step in which the above key is added to the present term; and the eight step in which the above key is added to the present term is included in the nine step in which the said nine step is included (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 13”).

Paragraph 14: In paragraph 13, following the implementation of the above-mentioned 8 phase, the Korea-U.S. A.S. A.S. A.S. A.S. A.S. 10-S. A.S. A.S. A.S. 11-S.S. E.S. A.S. A.S. A.S. A.S. A.S.

In paragraph 15: In paragraph 14, the above 11-stage 11 shall be converted to English if the language is determined in English at the 10-stage above, and if the above language is determined in Korean, the Modrid shall be converted to English, and if it is determined in Korean, the Modles shall be included in the 12-stage Modern automatically converted (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 15").

In paragraph 16: In paragraph 14, the above 10-stage 10-stage Modern shall be determined in Korean if the Modern is in Korean and the Modern satisfies the necessary conditions of Korean language, and if the Modern is in English and the Modern is not more than four consecutive places, the above Modern shall be included in the 12-stage Modern automatic conversion (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 16").

Paragraph 17: 17: In the case of the first-class automatic conversion method applicable to the document entry method equipped with the CPU and the Megry; the second-stage of the entry of at least one key after the said stage; the third-stage of the entry of the above-mentioned key; the fourth-stage of the entry of the above-mentioned key if the key is determined to be a key corresponding to Korean or English; the fifth-stage of the issuance of the ruling on the Korea-U for the above-mentioned term after the fourth-stage; the sixth-stage of the conversion of the Modrid; the seventh-stage of the conversion of the Modboard after the sixth-stage above; the seventh-stage of the above entry after the second-stage; if it is determined that the key received at the third-stage is not a key corresponding to Korean or English; the issuance of the ruling on the above term shall be made in accordance with the automatic conversion method including the nine-stage conversion of the above-stage after the 8th stage; and the conversion method (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 17”).

In paragraph 18: In paragraph 17, the above-mentioned 5-stage 5 shall be determined in the Korean language when the Modrid is in Korean and satisfies the rules of association of the Korean language, and the above-mentioned Modrid shall include the 11-stage automatic conversion in the English language when the Modrid is English and the Modrid does not exist in four consecutive Englishs in the English language (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 18").

In paragraph 19: In paragraph 17, the above 6-stage Modrids, where the Modrids are in Korean and is determined in English at the fifth-stage Modrids, the Modrids shall be converted into English Modrids, and where the Modrids are in English and are determined in Korean at the fifth-stage Modrids, the Modrids shall include the 11-stage Modrids converted into Korean (hereinafter “paragraph 19”).

Paragraph 20: In paragraph 17, if the above eight steps are deemed to be not the English language that satisfies the rules of the association of the Korean language and satisfies the rules of the association of the Korean language, the said words shall be determined in Korean, and if the words are deemed to be the English language that satisfies the rules of the association of the Korean language, the said words shall be determined in Korean, and if the words are deemed to be the English language that is deemed to include the 11 step in which the said words are determined as the English language (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 20”).

Paragraph 21: In paragraph 18 of this Article, the English language in the first stage of 11 above means the English language language i, e, i, o, u, A, E, I,O, U and Y y, an automatic conversion method (hereinafter referred to as "paragraph 21") with the characteristic of the English language excluding Y.

Section 22: In any of the paragraphs of paragraphs 18 through 17 above, the above-mentioned Section 5 includes the 12-stage determined in English in the language as the shamp if any unnecessary shraw is used, and the prosecutor whether the above-mentioned shraw is used or not shall include the 13-stage automatic transition method (hereinafter referred to as the "paragraph 22") with the characteristics of including the 13-stage converting into Korea, which considers that the said shraw is used if there are no two or more shraw in Korean as corresponding to the key, and if the said shraw is subdivided into the said shamp if there is no two or more shraw in Korean.

(b) A quoted invention;

(1) A quoted invention 1 [the Patent Gazette (No. 64-53265 (Evidence No. 6), March 1, 1989]

The invention is an invention of the name of "roman converted device", which is a device to convert Japanese language to Japanese language if it is entered by letter, and vice versa if it is entered into the Roman as a Roman, it is an device to convert Japanese language corresponding to it.

This invention is equipped with a method of determining the permissibleness of text, which determines whether the input language is permitted in the Japanese language, and a method of converting the input text into a foreign language, if it is not permitted by a means of converting the Japanese language into a foreign language, or by a method of determining permissibleness of text, the input language is converted into another language.

In particular, this invention is a one-way converting into the Japanese language (Roma ? one-way converting into the Japanese language, depending on whether or not there is a language/English registered in the main language/side language database in the Roman text column which has been entered up to that time by the user, by sclifying the conversion order key.

(2) Invention 2 (Patent No. 1993-9759 (Evidence A7) disclosed in the Korean Patent Gazette on July 28, 1992)

The invention of the title "the method of automatic conversion into Korean" is an invention of the name "the method of alphal conversion into Korean", which is a sound-scale automatic conversion device that can convert into the English alpha of the corresponding alpha in the order of inputs when the letters that cannot be written in Korean have been written in Korean, and on the contrary, if the current alpha is kept in English by inspecting the number of times of the alpha of the alpha in which the alpha is continuously entered into English, and if it is entered into more than a certain time, it

The cited invention 2, when data violating the rules of the Korean language language law is entered in the course of performing the work in the Korean language input code, shall be deemed as English and the input code shall be converted into the English name book, and when the English name is converted into three consecutive times in the English name book, the Korean language name shall be converted into the Korean name book.

(3) cited Invention 3 [The dissertations for doctor's degree in graduate school of Seoul University (Evidence A8) on February 1993]

"In the Korean language style analysis using sound information and multiple unit information" is a doctoral thesis of a doctoral degree that is called "in the Korean language style analysis," and, in order to supplement the appropriate elements and the frequency of prior search that arise when applying the existing formal analysis theory in the Korean language, it presents the standards for processing of literature and legal form and non-permanent phenomena from the perspective of computer language science using sound information and multiple unit information. Of the above contents, the part related to the patented invention of this case is an analysis (A.8 No. 50 to 53 pages) and Appendix 5, and the part related to the patented invention of this case is an analysis (A. 50 to 53 pages) of Chapter 4.1.1. and Appendix 5. The first place of the investigation using the survey negative pool of Appendix 5 is described in the algo (A. 8 E. 4-2 and the attached Form No. 4).

(4) cited Invention 4 [Patent No. 1986-681 (No. 2) disclosed in the Korean Patent Gazette on December 16, 1985]

As an invention of the name of "Korean language/Korean Dental Protocol", the Korean language book, which is classified by a unit of language using strings or literature books appearing in the literature, is automatically interpreted, and the Korean language/Korean version is converted into one automatically as an invention of the name of "Korean language/Korean characters" by a language hacke converting the part capable of Chinese conversion into one automatically.

The cited invention 4 has the effect of automatically converting one into one, when determining whether it is possible to convert one, referring to the Chinese database, and when there is a person corresponding to the Korean language in the Chinese database, and when there is no one corresponding to the Korean language in the Chinese database, the conversion into one, and when there is no one corresponding to the Korean language in the Chinese database, the use of a document required by one, when the user enters only the Korean language, it is possible to automatically convert the words as required by the Korean language book into one.

C. The procedural background

(1) The instant trial decision

The defendant filed a trial for invalidation of a patent on the ground that the patented invention does not meet the requirements of specification (Article 42(3) and (4) of the Patent Act) and of newness and inventive step (Article 29(1) and (2) of the Patent Act). The Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board reviewed the patented invention on December 28, 200 and rendered a trial ruling accepting the defendant's claim on the ground that it does not meet the requirements of specification (Article 42(3) and (4) of the Patent Act.

(2) Summary of the grounds for the instant trial decision

(A) Whether Article 42(3) of the Patent Act violates the requirements

The characteristic of the technical composition of the patented invention of this case is to automatically convert the words extracted from the initial language to the initial one, and to automatically convert according to the result of the determination. While the detailed description of the invention has provided several separate rules for selective conversion of the word separated from the initial one using the word distinguishingment and the search and extraction method, the word part cannot be automatically extracted from the word section subject to conversion by the technology included in the CPU and the CPU, and even if the word is automatically extracted from the initial one, it cannot be deemed that the detailed description of the patented invention of this case contains the content of the invention of this case to the extent that the CPU and the CPU can easily be easily converted into the unit by a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains.

(B) Whether Article 42(4) of the Patent Act violates the requirements

Article 42 (4) 1 and 3 of the Patent Act is not supported by a detailed explanation that the term "the essential composition" is input, and Article 42 (2) 2 through 12 of the Patent Act is also unlawful claims related to the above stage. Paragraphs 1 and 16 of the Patent Act, which limit the scope of "the subordinate claim", are limited to the input of sound height in the fish-saving force stage of the first stage. However, there is no detailed explanation on the processing of the sound key input information, and there is no essential composition. Paragraph 17 of the Patent Act also does not provide a detailed explanation on the processing of the sound key input information, and Paragraph 17 of the Patent Act does not provide a detailed explanation on the 8th stage in which the decision of suspension is made after the decision of suspension of the term and the 9th stage in which the decision of suspension of the term is made, and there is no illegality identical with Paragraph 1 of the Patent Act, and Paragraph 17 of the Patent Act does not provide a technical explanation on the composition of the essential part of paragraph 18 through 9.

(C) Determination of the instant patent invention that is inferred from the cited invention

The characteristic of the technical composition of the patented invention of this case is to automatically convert the words extracted from the initial language in accordance with the result of the judgment after conducting an original decision. (1) Although there is a difference between the cited invention 1 and the cited invention of this case, the cited invention 1 outlines the Japanese language as to the technology of selective conversion, it can be easily inferred the method of separating the research into the English unit and converting it into the Chinese language unit by applying the English mixed formula. (2) The quoted invention 2 is a conversion method applied to Korean language, and does not include a conversion into the Korean language unit, but it is not a technical composition, but it is not possible to convert the Korean language into the English alpha of the corresponding board in accordance with the order of its mother when the word that can not be found in Korean is converted into the English language, or as a contrary, the cited invention of this case is described in the previous code that can not be easily converted into the English language by continuously using the English language, and it is also described in the three separate description of the cited invention of this case as well as the previous rule that can not be converted into the text of this case.

(D) Accordingly, the patented invention of this case does not state in its detailed description the essential composition of the invention to the extent that the person having ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains can easily practice the patented invention, and since the claim in the claim is not supported by the detailed description or contains any essential element, it is not in violation of Article 42 (3) and (4) 1 and 3 of the Patent Act, and it is not in violation of Article 42 (4) and (4) 1 and 3 of the Patent Act, and since a person having ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains can easily make an invention from the cited invention, the patent registration shall be invalidated.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant trial decision

A. Summary of the grounds for revocation of the plaintiff's argument

(1) Claim concerning Article 42(3) of the Patent Act

(A) Information processing technology of a computer is widely used in the computer sector. Data entered from a computer sector is selectively converted into 2 data (Korean code) or 3 data (English code) or temporarily stored after converting 1 data into 2 data and 3 data (English code), and the process of processing 1 data selectively referred as necessary, i.e., the process of managing, storing, and controlling data (including the process of creating and processing responseboards). Thus, even if the specification of the patented invention of this case does not contain detailed descriptions in the specification of the patented invention of this case, it can be easily understood by a person with ordinary knowledge in the technology to which the invention pertains.

(B) The term “the end” of this case’s patent invention is merely a series of text codes, in which no determination is made with respect to the direction of Chinese display. The term “the end” of this Section is a part that can be perceived as a Korean language survey from among the input text heat. The publicly known technology alone is sufficient to include only the correct source and does not include the publicly known technology daily. As such, the detailed description of the patent invention of this case’s patent invention, which is the source of a separate survey technology, meets the legal requirements.

(C) A city for the 60 phase of the fourth degree of the patented invention of this case and its detailed explanation are insignificant errors and thus cannot be deemed as falling under the specification omission. The 63 phase is to add the Korean code corresponding to the Korean characters (e.g., characters) currently being generated, which is the pre-processing stage to conduct the Han Young decision and conversion (e.g., 64 or 73) with respect to the term currently being created, and is not a combination stage of Korean language by adding the Korean code corresponding to the Korean characters (e.g., characters) currently being recorded, and the above 4 phase is not a conversion stage. The above 4 phase is to be collected at the 69 phase or 73 phase if it is necessary as a result of the Han Young decision, and if it is not required to be integrated, it means that the invention is not required to go through the 69 phase or 73 phase, and if it is not necessary to convert the above 4Do and the paragraph 14 and paragraph 17 of this case is to be applied to the person who ordinarily entered in the order of data conversion.

(D) Accordingly, the detailed description of the patented invention of this case is indicated to the extent that it can easily be carried out by a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains.

(2) As to Article 42(4) of the Patent Act

(A) On the basis of well-known art, the determination is based on the description of the first degree, namely, a multi-computer system, the second degree 21 to 34 and 36 degrees, and the detailed description column for them. The first instance process of executing the patented invention of this case is stated to ensure that the first instance process of executing the patented invention of this case can be achieved smoothly by the normal function of the computer system, and the technical composition of the first instance recognition of the words is clearly explained to the extent that it can be easily implemented by a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains, and thus, Articles 1 through 16 of the patented invention of this case do not violate any of the subparagraphs of Article 42(4) of the Patent Act.

(B) With respect to the instant patent invention’s practice, the word “the stage of separation” (22) is not an essential element, but an ambiguous part in relation to the instant patent invention’s degree 4 and its detailed description column or omission of an essential element. As such, Articles 17 through 22 of the instant patent invention are supported by the foregoing Section 4 and the detailed description, each of the above provisions does not violate Article 42(4)1, 2 and 3 of the Patent Act.

(3) Claim as to Article 29(1) and (2) of the Patent Act

(A) The cited invention 1 is different from the patented invention of this case, which introduced the concept of a person who is separated from the word of this case, and the cited invention 3 introduces the technology that separates the word of this case from the word of this case, and thus constitutes one component of the patented invention of this case, since the value of the code corresponding to the word of the Roman, which is already entered by the user, is different from the one of the patented inventions of this case, in light of whether the code value corresponding to the word of the Roman, which was registered in the word of the Roman, which was entered by the time, is to convert the word into the word of the Roman, one direction, and thus, the cited invention 4 is to convert the word into Korean into the word of the Roman, or maintain it as it is, as it is automatically converted into the two directions.

(B) Accordingly, the patented invention of this case not only has a new composition that has not been initiated or proposed in the cited inventions, but also has a significant effect from its new composition, and thus, it cannot be easily claimed by a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains, as it is obvious.

B. Defendant’s assertion

(1) Claim concerning Article 42(3) of the Patent Act

(A) Since the process of managing, storing, and controlling fish-saving data cannot be deemed to be widely used technology, the process must be written in detail in the specification of the instant patent invention, but the specification of the instant patent invention does not state the process.

(B) The description of the specification of the patented invention in this case is difficult to find out whether the term "the term "the term "the term "the term" subject to conversion" in the second degree 21 is the term "the term "the term "the term" that should be converted into the term "the term "the term "the term", and the term "the term "the term "the term "the term" in the second degree 21" should be separated from the word "the term "the term "the term "the term". In particular, it is difficult to find out that the term "the end of the term" in the second degree 22 is easily carried out by a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention belongs, and in relation to the separation of the term "the term into the word "the term" in the second degree 22, it is a doctoral degree thesis that requires professional knowledge, which is not directly dealing with the technology separating the term "the term in the technical field by the research" and the word "the term in the second level 22", but merely it is difficult for a person who has an essential knowledge in the invention.

(C) The fifth page 2-3 of the specification of the patented invention of this case states that "the relevant functional division shall be initialized and the hair shall be early established in Korean or English language." The fourth degree of the patented invention of this case is written as "Mod'(60)" and the fourth degree of the patent invention of this case is written as "Mod'(Mod'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''s 60 is not consistent with the fourth degree of city and the fourth degree of city of the 60 degree of the 60 degree and the Korean union's 63 level of the 62 level of the 60 level of the 62 level of the input and the 70 level of the 63 level of the 70 level of the 4th level of the patent invention of this case are bound to be converted into

(D) Accordingly, the patented invention of this case is not indicated to the extent that it can be easily worked by a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains.

(2) Claim concerning Article 42(4) of the Patent Act

(A) Article 42(1)1 and 2 of the Patent Act is not supported by a detailed explanation due to the stage 21 and the stage 22 of the patent invention. Thus, Article 42(1)1 and 2 of the Patent Act is violated; due to the management and storage of fish-saving data and the omission in the control process to automatically implement the conversion of only the essential constituent elements of the patent invention of this case, Article 42(4)3 of the Patent Act is violated; Articles 2 through 16 of the Patent Act only provide for the determination rules of publication and do not limit the non-statement cost as stipulated in paragraph (1). Thus, Article 42(1)1 through 3 of the Patent Act is violated.

(B) From the relevant explanation of the specification of the instant patent invention to the degree 2 and 4 and the detailed explanation, the instant patent invention is deemed to be in violation of Article 42 (4) 1 through 3 of the Patent Act, since the instant patent invention’s management, storage, and control process for automatically converting the term into the term “the essential composition of the instant patent invention” is also omitted in the course of management, storage, and control of data for automatically converting the term into the term “the term “the term “the term “the term” is inevitably separated from the word “the term “the 2.............,” the term “the term” refers to the term “the term” in Article 42 (4) 1 through 3 of the Patent Act, and the term “the term” in Article 17(22) is not separated from the word “the term “the term” and “the term” in the instant patent invention.

(3) Claim as to Article 29(1) and (2) of the Patent Act

The patented invention of this case and each quoted invention are aimed at enhancing convenience and efficiency in the preparation of documents containing different types of languages by enabling automatic conversion between different types of languages, even if the Modrid conversion key is not accumulated in the document preparation containing different types of languages (the first language and the second language that does not have an investigation). The patented invention of this case can be easily described by the combination of identical or quoted inventions, and there is no inventive step because there is no difference in the operating effect. In particular, Article 17 through 22 of the patented invention of this case lacks essential elements of the patented invention of this case, and thus, it is difficult to determine the inventive step as it does not belong to the summary of the technology of the patented invention of this case.

C. Determination

(1) Whether Article 42(3) of the Patent Act is violated

(a) storage, management and control process of cans code, and data to be processed;

In general, the can code of a computer for the purpose of crime is one of the keys of each key (see evidence No. 11 of the photographs No. 2. 14, 2. 14, c. c.). The computer is ultimately aware of what letters are entered by combining can code, soft, control tower or alkl, which correspond to functional key (see evidence No. 19).

The instant patent invention is accompanied by a series of processes that process of processing, storing, and controlling data in the process of processing, storing, and controlling data, while carrying out the practice of the Korean Association (63) with respect to the input text key, and performing the Chinese language adjudication and conversion with respect to the current language section. Thus, it can be deemed that the process of processing, storing, and controlling data should be written in detail.

However, a series of processes, such as the processing, storage, and control of data, are conducted by the central processing device (CPU), lum (RAM), and the control of the performance of work among these elements. This program is determined by the choice of the program originator (person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains). Unless the inventor's intent to use a specific method among the various methods of preparation in favorable position in the judgment of inventive step exists, it shall be deemed that the author of the program has intention to use a specific method among the methods of preparation for clerks. Since the ordinary methods of processing is a description of common knowledge to a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains, it shall not be deemed that the specific example of performing such method has to be written.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the technology related to the automatic conversion into Korea-based one (a) is an essential element of the patented invention of this case, and therefore, it shall be written in detail as to which technique has been adopted for the automatic conversion into Korea-U.S. However, if each element of the invention is not written in detail, the extent of the description is determined by whether a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains is unable to practice the patented invention because it is impossible to grasp the substance of the invention unless it is written in detail, and the whole elements of the invention are not necessarily written in detail. Thus, the series of processes related to the processing, storage, and control of the data related to the automatic conversion into Korea-U.S. patented invention of this case are ordinary methods conducted in the computer, and therefore, it is not necessary to enter them in detail in the specification. Thus, the defendant's argument is without merit.

(B) Selective thesis

In Gap evidence No. 8, "The 4nd unit analysis" indicates that an investigation is conducted by analyzing the forms and forms of literature and states that "a algorithm is found to be the first stage location of the investigation." The algorithm is related to the technology that separates the investigation from the word of the investigation by referring to the prior investigation of Appendix 5 (No. 151 or 153 of the evidence No. 8). It can be easily understood if it is a person with basic knowledge about the program even if the content is not the average technician who has recorded computerized.

Furthermore, this paper proposes a method of using sound and multiple unit information in order to supplement the inappropriate elements that arise when applying the previous form theory to Korean language under the title of "the analysis of the Korean language form and multiple unit information using sound and multiple unit information". Since the content of the survey analysis in the above paper has been arranged in front of the thesis, even before the publication of this paper, it can be seen as a technology (see evidence A23) that has been widely known or has been being studied. Therefore, even if the detailed description of the patented invention in this case does not contain detailed description (22) in the stage of separating the survey and words of this Section from the detailed description of the patented invention in this case, it is a technology that can easily understand and implement by a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains, referring to the above thesis.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that since the above a doctoral thesis is a doctoral thesis, it cannot be easily obtained by a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains, and its contents cannot be easily understood in light of the characteristics of a doctoral degree thesis. However, as long as the source of technology separating the investigation and words from the specification of the patented invention in this case clearly stated in the specification of the patent invention in this case, it is not impossible to access even if there is a little difference in the convenience in data use, and even if a doctoral thesis is seen above, it is easily understandable by a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention belongs. Thus, the defendant's argument is without merit.

(C) the entry in the phase 21 and phase 22 of section 2.

If a term subject to conversion from the second degree of the patented invention of this case is input (stage 21), the term is divided into the word and the word and the word, and the following process is carried out. Even if the process of generating, processing, storing, and separating the investigation and the word by the input key is not specified for the reasons as described in the above (a), a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains can easily understand it, even if it is not specified for the reasons as described in the above (a).

Meanwhile, the defendant asserts that the initialization stage (60), the implementation stage of the Korean Union (63), and the Madrid conversion are unclear. ① Since the 4th phase is urbanized in the 60 phase, problems may arise in the 61 phase and 62 phase. However, according to the detailed description of the invention "(60), .......... are early established in the Korean or English package (60%) according to the description "(3,18 pages 6 through 9)" (3, 18 pages) of the invention, this is obvious clerical error in the Korean or English package, or one of the two replicas in Korean and English, which is similar to the implementation of the 6th phase in English, the defendant's argument that the 6th phase of the above decision of the 194 phase should not be understood as having been carried out, and if the 6th phase of the decision of the 6th phase of the 6th phase of the 194 phase of the decision of the 196th phase of the implementation of the 7th phase of the Korean Association's.

(D) Sub-committee

Therefore, it is true that there is a disagreement between the description of the drawings and the description of the patented invention in this case or there is a little clerical error in the description, but it is not a big impact on understanding the patented invention in this case by these clerical errors, and it is possible for a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to understand the patented invention in this case by sufficiently distinguishing clerical errors. Thus, the specification of the patented invention in this case cannot be deemed to violate Article 42(3) of the Patent Act.

(2) Whether Article 42(4) of the Patent Act is violated

(A) Paragraphs 1 to 16

Pursuant to Paragraph 1, the first step is the one in which a can code is entered, and the second step is the same as the one in which a central control device is delivered to a stringer when a string code is successively stored in a can code. Thus, even if the detailed description of the invention is not detailed in the detailed description, a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains can easily understand it even if the invention is not detailed in the detailed description. The second step is the one in which the word is separated from the word in the input language and the investigation as described in the above [2.c. (1)(b). Even if the two step is not detailed in detail, the two step is the one in which a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains can understand it easily by referring to the thesis described in the specification, so the second step is also the one in which the detailed description of the invention is supported and clearly and clearly stated in the three step, and thus, it is not only the three step in which the invention is described in the detailed description but also the three step in which the invention is described in the three step.

Paragraph 2 to 16 is the dependent claim under Paragraph 1, and there is no part that specifically limits each stage under Paragraph 1 or re-determines any stage under Paragraph 1, and the statement is not clear. However, Paragraph 14 to 16 includes not only the word separated from the word at the time of completion of the term, but also the word being separated from the word at the time of completion of the term, and the word being separated from the word at the time of investigation, and the word being separated from the word at the time of completion of the term, and the word being separated from the word at the time of the survey, and the fact that the conversion is carried out is added. However, this is also sufficiently supported by the Modrid conversion phase (in particular, 3, 4, 5 degrees) of the drawings of the patented invention of this case (stage 69, 73) and the related description in the specification.

(B) Paragraphs 17 to 22.

The first or seventh stages of Paragraph 17 are supported by the city in the above 4 degree because it can be seen that the key which was entered after conducting the initialization and inspecting the input key is corresponding to Korean or English, i.e., if it is determined that the separater is not a separater, it is necessary to add the input key to the language section and make a decision on the Chinese territory on the generated fish section, and then convert it into the key entry stage, and then return it back to 61 steps after going through the 60 or 64 degrees in the 4th degree, the 69 or 73 degrees in the 19th step in the 19th step in the 4th step in the 3rd step, and in particular, it is supported by the city in the above 4th degree in the above 4 degree in the 61th step in the 61st step in the 4th step in the 2nd step in the 3rd step, and it is also clearly stated in the 2nd step in the detailed explanation.

In addition, paragraphs 18 through 22 are claims limiting each phase of Paragraph 17 as dependent claims of Paragraph 17, and these claims are also clearly stated, and they are supported by detailed descriptions for reasons such as Paragraph 17.

On the other hand, the defendant is an essential element of the patented invention of this case. The judgment and conversion of the Korean language without going through this stage is an omission of an essential element of the invention and it is in violation of Article 42 (4) 3 of the Patent Act. However, whether an invention is omitted or not shall be determined by whether it can obtain an essential element of the invention without such an element compared with the description of the detailed description of the invention. As a result, all of the elements introduced through a detailed description and drawing cannot be understood as an essential element of the invention, and as long as it is supported by a detailed description and clearly stated, what element of the claim should be stated in a claim is supported by the detailed description, and it is an issue that an inventor can be selected by taking into account the scope of protection as a prior invention and right, and it is an issue that such invention (claim) can act as an invention, and it is not an essential element of the invention of this case, and as long as it is clearly stated in the above Article 42 (4) 2 (3) of the Patent Act, it is not an essential element of the invention of this case.

(C) Sub-decisions

Therefore, Article 42 (4) 1 through 3 of the Patent Act cannot be said to be in violation of Article 42 (4) 1 through 3 of the Patent Act because the detailed description of the invention is not only supported by the detailed description, but also clearly and concisely stated, and it is difficult to see that there is an omission of the information which is indispensable for

(5) Whether Article 29(1) and (2) of the Patent Act are violated

(A) Paragraph 1 and 4 of the quoted invention

(1) Preparation for purposes

Paragraph (1) of this Article provides that when a key is entered regardless of the input code, it is not necessary to change the daily input code when it is automatically determined in accordance with the rule of Korea or English and automatically converted into the corresponding language. The cited invention 4 is similar to both inventions in that: (a) it is intended to automatically interpret the Korean language letter, which is divided into a language unit by using the marry or text book, appearing in the door, and automatically convert the Chinese version, which is included in the language column into an automatic one; and (b) the subject of conversion is Korean, English, and Korean/Korean one, regardless of the input code, even if the user does not convert the input code into a daily one, the purpose of both inventions is to automatically determine and convert the input code into another type regardless of the input code.

2) As to components

A) Stage 1

The first step is the stage to create the corresponding term corresponding to the key which has been entered until the separation is entered, and it can be seen as the same stage as the stage to create the corresponding term corresponding to the key which has been entered from the cited invention 4 to the time the separation is entered.

B) Stage 2

The second stage is a stage of separating the language generated in the event of the separationr’s input from the word in accordance with the algorithm of public notice, and the cited invention 4 is a component of separating the word later than the word “here” only in cases where more than one word is included. In other words, paragraph 1 is separate in accordance with the principle of separation from the word “in the event there is no word subject to conversion” but the cited invention 4 is not divided into the word “in the event there is no word subject to conversion” and the word “in the event there is no word subject to investigation” and “in the case of the cited invention 4, the cited invention 4 is not separated from the word “in the event of the absence of the word subject to conversion” and the survey.

C) Stage 3

The third step of Paragraph 1 is to determine whether separate words are subject to conversion according to the rules of the law, and the cited invention 4 is to determine whether they are registered in the Chinese database. In other words, Paragraph 1 is to determine whether the quoted invention 4 is subject to conversion according to whether they are registered in the Chinese database without any rule, since paragraph 1 is to determine whether they are registered in the Chinese database.

D) Stage 4

The fourth phase of converting the word determined into the said word is not the same as the case where the word in question is in Korean, the case where the word in question is in English and in English, and the case where there is no investigation, while the cited invention 4 is converted into a single person stored in the Korean database according to the result of the judgment. In other words, in the case of paragraph 1, the conversion means is at least three, one of the three, while the quoted invention 4 is different in that the cited invention simply takes the direction of Korean as a single person.

(iii) preparation for effects of action;

Paragraph 1 of Paragraph 1, which is a tamper regardless of the input tamp, but the quoted invention 4 is initiated by the operation of the Korea-China racker racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's racker's

4) Sub-committee

Therefore, Paragraph 1 and 4 of this Article are similar in that they automatically convert a term composed of different kinds of characters into the relevant language. However, their composition and its effects differ from each other. Thus, a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains cannot easily make an invention of Paragraph 1 from 4 of this Article.

(B) Paragraph (1) and other quoted inventions

1) A cited invention 1

The cited invention 1 is an apparatus converted from the Roman to the Roman in the daily language, and is intended to convert the Roman into the Japanese language corresponding thereto if the Roman is entered according to the voice of the characters written in the Japanese language Ba. It is not a stage to separate the word and the investigation, and if an employer enters the conversion order key in an cromatic manner, it is different from the structure of paragraph (1) by separating the word and the survey into the Japanese language unit and converting it into the Japanese language in accordance with the registration of the main language/side language database in the recorded Roman text column.

In the operating effect, the quoted invention 1 must be input by the user, but the paragraph 1 is different in terms of automatically judging and converting according to the prescribed rules, and even in the transition, paragraph 1 is carried out automatically in both directions, but the quoted invention 1 is different in that it only takes the direction of Japanese fishing from the Roman to the Roman.

Therefore, Paragraph 1 and the quoted invention 1 are different in terms of the composition and effect of the invention, so a person with ordinary knowledge in the art to which the invention pertains cannot easily make an invention under Paragraph 1 by the quoted invention 1.

2) A cited invention 2

The cited invention 2 is, compared to the execution of the automatic conversion of a sound unit, which forms a sound saving by combining the previous sound signals with the sound signals entered at the present time. While paragraph 1 is divided into the word "the word "the word "the word" and the word "the word "the word "the word "the word "which is entered" and then conducts an conversion into a term saving unit in accordance with the result of the determination, it is not the quoted invention 2, and the quoted invention 2 is carried out in the stage of separating the term "the term "the word "the word "the word" and "the term "the word "the word" generated by the separationr from the word "the word "the word "the word" and "the word "the word "the word "the word" as "the word "the word"

3) A cited invention 3

The cited invention 3 is not a single-permanent conversion technology, but a technology that separates the words from the words in the input in order to analyze the text of Korean language in the language section. It is only written in the stage of separating the words in paragraph 1 from the words in paragraph 1, but is not written at all on the remaining stages. Thus, it is different from paragraph 1.

4) Sub-committee

Therefore, the paragraph 1 and the quoted inventions 1, 2, and 3 are identical because their composition and action effects are different.

(C) Comprehensive comparison with the cited invention under Paragraph (1) and the cited invention

Invention 1 and quoted invention 4 are related to the technology converted according to whether the data entered in the text is registered in the database, and the quoted invention 2 is an invention converted into a basic unit, not a language saving formula, and the quoted invention 3 is a technology that analyzes the text of the Korean language language, so it is difficult to be combined due to the characteristics of each quoted invention.

Even if it is possible for an association among the cited inventions for domestic affairs, paragraph (1) may not easily make an invention from the quoted inventions. In other words, the first step to create a corresponding language with the height entered until the separation is entered in paragraph (1) is not described in paragraph 1, 2, and the third step to separate the language from the cited invention is described in only the quoted invention 3. However, according to the third step and the result of the determination performed in accordance with the rule of law and regulations of the Republic of Korea, the fourth step to convert the language into Korean, English, Korean language, or English language into the cited invention is not mentioned in the quoted invention. However, although the second step to make a ruling by applying the rule of law and regulations on the decline of language entered in the quoted invention 2 is indicated in the quoted invention 1, 200, not in the initial stage to make a ruling in the English unit, it is not easy for the association to conduct the ruling by applying the rule of law and regulations, and even if it is not carried out at least one of the three steps to convert into the cited invention into the same one of paragraph (1).

(D) Centrality

Therefore, Paragraph (1) is different from the cited inventions, and even if the quoted inventions are combined with each other, it cannot be easily conducted under Paragraph (1) of this case, and Paragraph (1) is more advanced than the quoted inventions.

In addition, paragraphs (2) through (16) are dependent claims under Paragraph (1). As seen above, as long as Paragraph (1) is an inventive step, these paragraphs are more inventive step than the cited inventions. Paragraph (17) includes both the major elements of Paragraph (1) and the stage in which the decision and conversion is made with respect to the fish sections created in the process of creating a fishing season, and Paragraph (17) includes the stage in which the decision and conversion is made with respect to the fish sections created in the process of creating a fishing season, and therefore, paragraphs (18) through (2) fall under paragraph (1) and paragraphs (17) and paragraphs (18) through (22) are dependent inventions under Paragraph (17). Thus, paragraphs (1

(6) Other matters.

The defendant asserts that the withdrawal of the trial for correction filed by the plaintiff to the Intellectual Property Tribunal in relation to the patented invention of this case was the invalidation of the patented invention of this case. Thus, the plaintiff's withdrawal of the trial for correction is recognized, but it is difficult to see that the invalidation of the patented invention of this case is also recognized on the sole ground of such fact (it can not be deemed that it directly affects the validity of the patented invention of this case even if it can be seen that the invalidation of the patent of this case

3. Conclusion

Thus, since the patented invention of this case is valid in violation of the provisions of Article 29(1) and (2) and Article 42(3) and (4) of the Patent Act, the trial decision of this case, which has different conclusions, is unlawful, and therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by accepting the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking revocation.

[Attachment Form Omission]

Judges Of Kimchi (Presiding Judge)

Note 1) It appears that the term “information and communications language” is used in a variety of sense, but in this case, it means that all data elements in the list stored in order to search for or cultivate certain data are investigated in order.

Note 2) Serials, each of which is transmitted to central processing devices (CPU), whenever keys in IBM computers and headings or is related to each other, have unique injection codes. The injection code is not the same as the Aki part of letters, numbers, or symbols indicated above, but is the same as the key itself, and the injection code for each individual key is always the same. When key is transmitted to the computer, the injection code of the key is converted into a skiing one of its key keys in the form of a computer. For example, it is possible to create multiple letters, such as a small text, A, and Seodaemun, and one of its keys, such as A, in consideration of the situation of the key’s prior dynas (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da12538, Apr. 2, 2011).