All prime ideals are invertible $\Rightarrow$ Dedekind domain $\newcommand{\p}{\mathfrak{p}}$ $\newcommand{\a}{\mathfrak{a}}$
Let $A$ be a one-dimensional Noetherian domain.
I am thinking about this claim:

If all prime ideals of $A$ are invertible, then $A$ is a Dedekind domain.

Is that true?
I tried to show a unique factorization into prime ideals.
Indeed, an integral domain is a Dedekind domain,
iff all nonzero ideals admit a unique prime factorization.
To show this, I'm going to show following two lemmas.
If it is proved, we can prove a unique factorization
by the same way as a Dedekind domain (cf. Neukirch, Algebraic Number Theory).
Let $\a \neq 0$ be an ideal of $A$.
I proved the first lemma:

There exists prime ideals $\p_1, \dots, \p_r$ such that
  $$
\a \supseteq \p_1\dots \p_r
$$

by the same way as a Dedekind domain,
because it is not used that $A$ is integrally closed.
But I can't show the second lemma:

$$\a\p^{-1} \supsetneq \a.$$

I found that to show the second lemma, it is sufficient to show that
$$ \bigcap_{n=1}^\infty \p^n = 0. \label{a}\tag{1}$$
We assume that it is proved.
If $\a\p^{-1} = \a$, $\a = \a\p$.
By induction, we get $\a = \a\p^n$ for $\forall n > 0$.
We use $\eqref{a}$, then we get $\a = 0$.
It is a contradiction.
However, I can't prove $\eqref{a}$.

If $\mathfrak a\mathfrak p^{-1}=\mathfrak a$, then $\mathfrak a\mathfrak p=\mathfrak a$. Moreover $(\mathfrak aA_{\mathfrak p})(\mathfrak pA_{\mathfrak p})=\mathfrak aA_{\mathfrak p}$. By Nakayama lemma we get $\mathfrak aA_{\mathfrak p}=0$, so $\mathfrak a=0$ which I suppose you don't want.
