2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

(a) The registered trademark 1) of this case: Date of application / Date of decision on registration / Date of registration / Date of registration / Number : C/D/ E2 January 16, 2018: Designated goods classified into Category 3: Initials, stuffs, agricultural sterilizations, agricultural insecticides, agricultural insecticides, and insects;

B. 1) The Plaintiff’s trademark of the mark “” used from January 8, 2019 to the Defendant (hereinafter “Fone Star Trademark”) which was used by the Plaintiff from January 8, 2019.

A) In relation to the instant registered trademark, the former Trademark Act (amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same applies) was amended.

(2) On September 17, 2019, the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board rejected all the Plaintiff’s claim for invalidation on the ground that the instant registered trademark is not similar to the instant registered trademark and thus dismissed the said claim (hereinafter “instant decision”).

【Ground for recognition】An absence of dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the trial decision of this case is unlawful

A. The summary of the party’s assertion 1) The instant registered trademark is similar to a prior-use trademark, which is recognized as indicating the goods of a specific person by domestic consumers, and thus, constitutes grounds for invalidation of trademark registration under Article 7(1)12 of the former Trademark Act, and is similar to a prior-use trademark which is recognized as indicating the goods of a specific person, and thus, is likely to mislead or confuse consumers as to the goods identical with or similar to those of another person’s goods, and thus, is likely to mislead or confuse the source.