If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

The defendant is the representative of C Co., Ltd. in Sju City B.

On June 25, 2018, the Defendant posted product photographs on 546 pages of the E Publicity Book, an incorporated association, for the purpose of advertising lighting, etc., a new product at the above C place of business, and the F, a trademark holder, using the trademark “I” registered with the Korean Intellectual Property Office as H, with the type of 11, such as G lighting, etc. as designated goods.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of F’s complaint, trademark register, and promotional book-issuance E, an incorporated association, of the Acts and subordinate statutes 546 pages;

1. Article 230 of the Trademark Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant’s act cannot be deemed as infringement of trademark rights, since the Defendant’s act indicated in the Defendant’s lighting organization as “J” is not intended to indicate the place of origin, which is the essential function of the trademark, but is only used to distinguish goods.

The act of using another person's registered trademark on goods identical with or similar to the designated goods constitutes an act of infringing another person's trademark right. However, even in the case of using another person's registered trademark, if it is not intended to indicate the source which can be seen as the essential function of the trademark and it cannot be seen as an act of infringing another person's trademark right. In order to determine whether a trademark is being used as a trademark, it shall be determined in full view of the relation with the goods, the mode of using the mark (i.e., the location, size, etc. indicated on the goods), the widely and well-knownness of the registered trademark, the user's intent and use circumstances, etc.

Supreme Court Decision 2002Do3445 Delivered on April 11, 2003