beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
(a) The Defendant’s registered design (certificate A 3) (1)/ the filing date/registration date: The name of the product C/D/E (2): The F (3) drawings: the same shall apply to attached Form 1;
B. (1) Prior Designs (1) 1 (No. 4 (a) / filing date / filing date / filing date / filing date: The name of the good on October 20, 2014 (b) of No. 7655// October 27, 2013: The “A” in attached Form 2.
(2) Prior designs 2 (A) (No. 5) (a) / filing date/registration date/registration date/public notice: The name of a product on March 6, 2014//34538/11, 6/11, 2014/31. 20 March 20, 2014: The name of a product: the French board (c): [Attachment 2] drawings.
C. (1) On June 9, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a petition for a registration invalidation trial (hereinafter referred to as “registration invalidation trial”) against the Defendant on the ground that “The registered design of this case is similar to the part of the prior design 1, which was filed and published after the filing date of the application, prior to the amendment to Article 5(3) of the former Design Protection Act (wholly amended by Act No. 11848, May 28, 2013; hereinafter the same shall apply) or (2) a design that could be easily created by a person with ordinary knowledge in the field to which the design pertains (hereinafter “ordinary designer”) prior to the filing date, and falls under Article 5(2) of the same Act, and falls under Article 5(2) of the same Act.”
(2) On August 21, 2017, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered the instant trial ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request on the grounds that “The instant registered design does not correspond to Article 5(3) of the former Design Protection Act because it does not correspond to part of the prior design 1, but does not fall under Article 5(2) of the former Design Protection Act because it is not a design easily created by prior design 2.”
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5 respectively.