2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

가. 이 사건 등록상표 1) 등록번호/ 출원일/ 등록일: B/ C/ D 2) 구성: 3) 지정상품: 상품류 구분 제25류의 가죽신, 고무신, 고무장화덧신, 골프화, 구둣창, 나막신, 낚시용화(靴), 농구화, 단화, 뒷축(Heels , 등산화, 럭비화, 레이스부츠, 목욕용 샌들 등록원부에는 ‘샌달’로 기재되어 있으나, 외래어 표기법에 따라 ‘샌들’로 고쳐 쓴다.

hereinafter the same shall apply);

Before bath slurf, reflectrs, brus, brus, vinyls, vinyls, sandbrus, skiings, sandbrus, slurgs, slurgs, slurgs, slurgs, slurgs, refrats, backheadings for shoess, strings, refrating refratings, strings, refratings, refratings, spatizations, sphratizations or sandbrus, hex, strat, land shooting, work paintings, slurgetization, frat, bruging, bruging, bruging, bruging, Handbl,

B. On April 11, 2014, the Defendant asserted that the registration of the instant registered trademark should be revoked pursuant to Article 73(1)3 of the Trademark Act (No. 2014Da893) since the instant registered trademark was not used in the Republic of Korea for at least three consecutive years without good cause against the Plaintiff, and that the registration of the instant registered trademark should be revoked pursuant to Article 73(1)3 of the Trademark Act.

On October 2, 2014, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered the instant decision to revoke the registration of the instant registered trademark by citing the Defendant’s appeal for the reason that the Plaintiff did not submit a written response and it is not proved that there is justifiable reason for the Plaintiff to properly use or not use the instant registered trademark.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The Plaintiff’s ground for revocation of the decision by the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff, from around 2008 to around 2014, with the mark of the instant registered trademark, rubber, rubber, finites, plastic paintings, sandbination, and oral remarks.