The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Patent Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The Patent Act separately provides for a trial to confirm the scope of a right and a trial to invalidate a patent;

A trial to confirm the scope of a patent right is a procedure to confirm whether the challenged invention, which is the object of the trial, belongs to the scope of protection of the registered patent invention.

(Article 135 of the Patent Act). An invalidation trial against a patent is final and conclusive as a procedure to determine whether a registered patent has grounds for invalidation, and a trial ruling invalidating a patent becomes final and conclusive.

(Article 133 of the Patent Act even in cases where there are grounds for invalidation due to lack of non-obviousness, unless a trial decision on invalidation becomes final and conclusive in an invalidation trial of a patent, the patent cannot be determined on the assumption that the patent is invalid in other

In a trial to confirm the inventive step of a patent in a trial to confirm the scope of a patent right established as a procedure to determine the scope of a patent right, not only the scope of a trial to confirm the scope of a patent right, but also the granting of an original patent invalidation trial to a trial to confirm the scope of a patent right, thereby inconsistent with the division of functions among the aforementioned two trials (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2012Hu4162, Mar. 20, 2014). Therefore, even where the inventive step of a patent is denied except for cases where a patent invention is publicly known technology, the validity of a patent right registered in

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 81Hu56 Decided July 26, 1983, Supreme Court Decision 2000Hu235 Decided June 14, 2002, Supreme Court en banc Decision 97Hu2095 Decided October 27, 1998, and Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Hu4162 Decided October 26, 198, etc.). However, in a trial to confirm the scope of a right, not only where an invention subject to confirmation compared to a patented invention was made only with a publicly known technology but also where a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field can easily implement it from the publicly known technology.