권리범위확인(상)
1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board on August 21, 2013 by the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board is revoked.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
1. Basic facts
A. 1) Date of application/registration date/registration number of the instant registered service mark: (i) Composition of May 28, 2009 / October 9, 2012 / 241654(2) : 3) Designated service Business: The person entitled to registration: the Defendant
(b) Composition of the challenged mark 1: The service business using sound wave 2) : The plaintiff;
C. 1) On April 16, 2013, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff used the challenged mark as a service mark against the Plaintiff on April 16, 2013, and that the challenged mark and the service business of this case are identical or similar to the registered service mark and fall under the scope of the right (affirmative) (affirmative), and that the scope of the right to confirm the scope of the trademark (hereinafter referred to as “instant adjudication”).
(2) On August 21, 2013, the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board filed a request for the adjudication of this case on the grounds that the challenged mark falls under the scope of the right of the registered service mark of this case. (A) Even if the Plaintiff did not use the challenged mark at present, it cannot be concluded that there is no possibility to use the challenged mark in the future in the light of the past, and thus, the instant request for adjudication has the interest in confirmation. (b) The Plaintiff used the challenged mark on the Plaintiff’s website, the U.S. unit, etc. for advertising and promoting its own scopic law, and thus, the challenged mark is used as a service mark.
C) The challenged mark and the instant registered service mark are similar and similar to the mark, and are identical or similar to the designated (use) service business. 【Ground of Recognition】 In the absence of dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 through 9 (including virtual number, the purport of the entire pleadings)
2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate
A. Whether the plaintiff is standing to sue, the defendant stated the plaintiff in the complaint as "B" and applied for correction of the party indication to "A", and such application is made.