beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.09.12 2015가합52692

손해배상(지)

Text

1. The defendant shall place the attached mark No. 1 on the physical disease and the package thereof, or shall mark it with the mark indicated above.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The plaintiff is a trademark holder of the following registered trademark (hereinafter referred to as "the trademark of this case"). The plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of manufacturing and selling visible containers and kitchen supplies.

A mark: Date of application/registration date//registration number: C/D/E designated goods: The defendant's mark is a company established for the purpose of manufacturing and selling plastic goods, such as water bags, cold and hot water tanks, sunbags, low temperature bottles, hot water ionbags, ice ices, portable icebablings (category 21 of goods classification).

The defendant uses the following marks in the physical disease of the kind of goods produced and sold by the defendant respectively:

The Defendant’s use of the first and second marks in the physical disease of the second marks in the product of this case as the goods of this case was an act of infringing the Plaintiff’s trademark right to use the first and second marks in the physical disease of the second marks, which were the ground for recognition, and there was no dispute, Gap 23, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

In addition, since the trademark of this case is widely recognized in Korea as the business mark indicating the plaintiff's product mark or the mark of the first and second marks of this case similar to this, the defendant's use of the first and second marks of this case is not clear in the plaintiff's assertion under Article 2 subparagraph 1 (a) or (b) of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (hereinafter "Unfair Competition Prevention Act"), but it is judged that the mistake of the product mark and the business mark is also asserted confusion.

constitute an unfair competitive act.

Even if the trademark of this case was not known, the trademark of this case was not known.

This constitutes an outcome containing the Plaintiff’s investment and effort, and the Defendant’s use of similar marks constitutes an unfair competition act under Article 2 subparag. 1(j) of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act.

Therefore, the defendant shall not engage in the above acts that constitute trademark infringement and unfair competitive acts, and the creation thereof.