[거절사정][공1987.3.1.(795),311]
Whether or not the trademark of this origin is similar to the trademark of this origin
In the trademark of the origin of the trademark indicated as "Wang", the trademark of this origin is recognized as "Wang" by the former part or as "Wang" by the latter part of the trademark, since there is no other indivisible relationship between the part of the trademark of this origin and the part of the trademark of this origin, and the trademark of this origin is recognized as "Wang" by the latter part of the trademark of this origin, and there is no distinctive character in the trademark of this origin, and in the trademark of this origin, the trademark of this origin does not have a distinctive character in the trademark of this origin as "Wang" by the latter part of the trademark of this origin, and in the trademark of this origin, there is no distinctive character in the trademark of this case of the trademark of this origin, the trademark of this origin is ultimately a "Wang", and in
Article 9(1)7 of the Trademark Act
Patent Attorney Hwang-soo et al., Counsel for the applicant
The Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office
Korean Intellectual Property Office Decision 655 decided August 29, 1986
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the applicant.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
According to the original trial decision, in determining the similarity of trademarks, the appellate court shall observe two trademarks used for the same or similar goods objectively, separately, and comprehensively, and determine the possibility of misunderstanding or confusion among the goods in the transaction. Even if there are different parts between the trademarks, if it is similar to the other parts, and it is easy to confuse the other parts in its name or concept, it shall be deemed similar trademarks (see Supreme Court Decision 84Hu70 delivered on December 26, 1984). The appellate court held that the trademark "Wang" and "Wang" are identical to the goods in the main trademark indicated as "Wang" and "Wang" are recognized as "Wang" or "Wang" in the latter part of the main trademark because there is no different relation between the two parts, and therefore, it shall be deemed as "Wang" or "Wang" as "Wang" in the main trademark indicated as "Wang" and "Wang" in the latter part of the trademark law, and therefore, it shall be deemed as "Wang" and the trademark "Wang" as "S" in the main part of the goods.
In light of the records, the above decision of the court below is just, and the party members of the lawsuit are not proper precedents in this case, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the decision of trademark ownership, or in the incomplete hearing or omission of judgment as otherwise alleged. Thus, the argument is groundless.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)