Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

가. 원고의 이 사건 등록상표 1) 등록번호/ 출원일/ 등록일/ 갱신등록일: 상표등록 C/ D/ E/ 2013. 7. 19. 2) 구성: 3 지정상품: 상품류 구분 제25류의 단화, 편상화, 가죽신, 골프화, 등산화, 샌달, 축구화, 농구화, 구둣창, 신발깔창, 핸드볼화, 육상경기용화, 장화, 방안화, 복싱화, 부츠, 비치슈즈, 슬리퍼, 야구화, 체조화, 하키화, 낚시용화, 뒷축, 스키화, 신발깔창, 신발용철제장식, 운동화, 작업화, 태권도화, 죠깅화, 신발안창

(b) Composition of the Plaintiff’s actual-use trademark 1: 2) Goods using the trademark: sports paintings and slots;

(c) The defendant's covered trademark 1: 2) Goods used: Clothing, fashion paintings, sports paintings, slots, sandbox and other goods;

D. (1) On October 23, 2018, the Defendant: (a) filed against the Plaintiff on the grounds that the instant registered trademark was wholly amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply) of the former Trademark Act (wholly amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016).

(2) On December 24, 2019, the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board claimed that the registered trademark of this case falls under Article 73(1)2, and filed a request for a trial to revoke the registration of the registered trademark of this case. On the ground that “the Plaintiff intentionally uses the trademark similar to the registered trademark of this case as the trademark of this case and caused ordinary customers or consumers to misunderstand or confuse the goods related to the Defendant’s subject trademark by intentionally using the trademark similar to the registered trademark of this case,” the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board rendered a trial ruling accepting the above request for a trial (hereinafter “instant trial ruling”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant registered trademark does not have grounds for revocation under Article 73(1)2 of the former Trademark Act for the following reasons. A)