beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.09.13 2018가합102557

서비스표권침해금지 청구의 소

Text

1. The defendant,

(a) A signboard with respect to each mark listed in the attached Table 2 with respect to the store service business listed in the attached Table 1 list;

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff holds a service mark right on the registered service mark (hereinafter “instant service mark”) as follows.

등록번호 : C 출원일/ 등록일/ 존속기간(예정)만료일 : D/ E/ F 표장 지정 서비스업 : (제43류)간이식당업, 레스토랑업, 뷔페식당업, 서양음식점업, 셀프서비스식당업, 스낵바업, 식당체인업, 식품조각업, 음식조리대행업, 한식점업 등

B. The Defendant, operating a Korean-style compound with the trade name of “H” on the sixth floor of the Seo-gu Daejeon-gu G building, uses each of the following marks (hereinafter “Defendant mark”) related to the business of the said restaurant in signboards, signboards, amounts, printed matters, printed matters, name cards, coophones, etc.

Defendant mark (1) / [2] The fact that there is no dispute over the Defendant mark (2) / [3], each entry of Gap 1 through 8 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. As to the defendant's infringement of the service mark right of this case, the mark of this case and the defendant mark of this case are composed of both the Korean language letters "H", the green line at the bottom of the part "I" and the green leaves at the right upper end of the "I", the English text gate of "J" and its "J" consist of the green lines at the bottom of the part "J" and the green leaves at the right upper right upper end, and there is no difference in the appearance of the letter and figure. In full view of the above, the defendant mark is substantially identical to the mark of this case.

In addition, the fact that the defendant uses the defendant's mark for a plastic restaurant business identical to the designated service business of the service right of this case is the same as the above, and the defendant ultimately infringes on the plaintiff's service right of this case, barring any special circumstance.

B. As to this, the defendant is using the defendant's mark in accordance with the legitimate right of use under the franchise agreement on the H restaurant.