등록무효(상)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
(a) Registration number (1)/filing date/registration date/registration date of the instant registered trademark : (3) on July 14, 2010: (a) mark of the trademark registration B/ C/D (2): - on the designated goods of the category 9 : the cover pool stamp for swimming-out use, water tank, lock-out ice ice ice, air tank, diving for diving, lock-out ice ice, lock-out tank, diving system, diving room, diving room, diving room, lock-out equipment (except for artificial smoking), lock-out, life raft, life raft, life boat, fire fighting boat - passenger ships, street, motorboat, boat, boat, boat, boat, vessel [ship and boat], irrigation boat, boat for boat use, boat string, boat string, boat sailing, boat boat, boat boat, water boat, yacht, boat boat, water boat, yacht, yacht, boat boat, water boat, yacht, yacht, water boat, yacht, water boat, yacht, yacht, boat, boat, yacht, boat, yacht, w.
(b) First Used Trademark (1) mark: A product used in INTX SAHW (2): A rubber boats, etc. (3): The plaintiff;
C. (1) On March 24, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a petition for a trial for invalidation of the registration of the instant registered trademark with the Intellectual Property Tribunal against the Defendant, stating that “The instant registered trademark falls under each subparagraph of Article 7(1)11 and 12 of the Trademark Act and thus its registration should be invalidated.”
(2) On June 23, 2015, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for a trial on the grounds that “the prior-use trademark is not known to the domestic or foreign general consumers as a trademark of a specific person, and thus does not fall under both Article 7(1)11 and 12 of the Trademark Act as at the filing date of the instant registered trademark or the decision of registration.”
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is to invalidate the registration of the instant registered trademark on the following grounds.
Therefore, the decision of this case, which has different conclusions, should be revoked in an unlawful manner.
The registered trademark of this case under Article 7 (1) 12 of the Trademark Act is the consumer of the United States as of the filing date.