2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

A. The registration number 1)/ the filing date/registration date of the instant registered trademark: the registered trademark No. 812155// January 13, 2009 / January 21, 2010 : 3) the former registered goods: The designated goods are as shown in the attached Form 4: The plaintiff

B. On June 4, 2015, the Defendant filed a petition with the Intellectual Property Tribunal for a trial seeking revocation of the trademark registration of this case on the ground that “The registered trademark of this case shall be revoked pursuant to Article 73(1)3 of the former Trademark Act (wholly amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply)”, stating that “The registration of this case shall be revoked pursuant to Article 73(1)3 of the former Trademark Act (wholly amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016; 2) since it did not prove any justifiable reason for non-use within three years prior to the filing date of the petition for a trial, and on April 1, 2016, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal did not prove that the registered trademark of this case was properly used within the Republic of Korea.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff, the holder of the instant registered trademark, around August 2010, is DMF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “DMF”).

The Defendant concluded a contract to establish a non-exclusive license on the instant registered trademark, and DMF supplied the instant registered trademark to the “Masung Industrial Cooperative,” a sales agent, for the period from May 23, 2015 to June 4, 2015, and sold it. As such, the instant registered trademark was prior to the date of the instant request for revocation.