2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. Registered service mark 1 of this case / Trademark Registration Number / Date of application / Registration : F/ G/H2) Former designated goods : 3) an applicant for a legal practice of Category 45 classified as service industry category : 15: The right holder (I and then transferred to the Defendant on November 23, 2018 after the I applied for registration.

A person shall be appointed.

B. On April 16, 2019, the Plaintiff filed for adjudication against the Defendant, a trademark holder of the instant registered service mark with the Intellectual Property Tribunal under Article 23 (1) 1 and 3 of the former Trademark Act (amended by Act No. 11113, Dec. 2, 201; hereinafter the same shall apply) on the ground that the Plaintiff did not comply with the definition of the mark under Article 2 (1) 2 of the former Trademark Act, and thus, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff and the Defendant filed for adjudication on the instant registered service mark as invalid under Article 23 (1) 4 of the former Trademark Act (Article 7 (1) 4 of the former Trademark Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff and the Defendant were aware that they were jointly operating the legal office, and that they did not intend to use the instant registered service mark until they were transferred to the Defendant, and thus, they did not have any intent to obtain an attorney qualification, and thus, the Patent Tribunal dismissed the instant registered service mark under Article 23 (1) 1301) of the former Trademark Act.

【Ground for recognition】An absence of dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the trial decision of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff.