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 title of the invention 1) invention of this case: Tool: A part of the machinery that moves to a location desired to the section; 2) filing date/registration date/registration number: D/E/B 3: Defendant 4) major contents and drawings: attached Table 1;
(hereinafter, the claim 1 of the patented invention of this case is referred to as the "claim 1 of this case", and the remainder of the claims is also referred to as the same method).
1) Prior Invention 1) The prior invention 1 (Evidence 5) of the prior invention 1 (Evidence 5) of the prior invention 5-11813, published on May 7, 1993, is an invention on the "the location-fixing mechanism of multi-clouds", which is published on May 7, 1993, and its main contents are as shown in Attached 2(1) of the prior invention 2 (Evidence 7) of the prior invention 2 (Evidence 7) published on November 17, 2005, which is published on November 17, 2005. The main contents are as stated in Attached 2(2) of the prior invention 2 of the Japanese Patent Gazette 2005-319485.
3) Prior Invention 3 (No. 9) of the Korean Patent Gazette published on February 22, 2006, published on February 22, 2006, is an invention related to the " hosting device with a window table" as stated in Article 10-206-001615 of the Korean Patent Gazette, which is published on February 22, 2006, and its main contents are as specified in attached Form 2(3) of the Prior Invention 4 (Evidence 10) of the Prior Invention 4 (Evidence 10) of the Korean Patent Gazette published on October 26, 1998, and the main contents are as specified in attached Form 2(4).
5) On January 12, 2001, the prior invention 5 (Evidence 11), the Korean Registered Patent Gazette No. 10-0286401, which was registered on January 12, 2001, is an invention on the “sn beamline transport distance correction method and device” and its main contents are as shown in attached Table 2(5). C. The Defendant asserted against the Plaintiff on August 18, 2014, against the Intellectual Property Tribunal, that the instant Claim for a trial for invalidation of registration is easy for a person with ordinary skills to make an invention from prior invention 1, 2, and 3.
2. On October 27, 2014, the Plaintiff deleted the claim 7 and combines the claim 1.