A. The Plaintiff is running a Korean-style restaurant business with the trade name of “C” in Seoul and Gyeonggi areas. The Defendant is running a Korean-style restaurant business with the trade name of “D” in Daejeon, which sells the French-style flag, cooling, etc.

B. On August 28, 2015, the Defendant registered the service mark “” (hereinafter “instant service mark”) (registration number F), and sent to the Plaintiff a written notification requesting the Defendant to suspend the use of the mark containing “G” on the ground that the Defendant is the person holding the instant service mark.

C. On September 25, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a trial to confirm the scope of passive rights that falls under the name of a conspicuous geographical name and does not fall under the scope of the right to the instant service mark (hereinafter “instant passive trial”). On December 10, 2015, the Defendant filed a trial to confirm the scope of active rights that the mark used by the Plaintiff falls under the scope of the right to the instant service mark (hereinafter “instant affirmative trial to confirm the scope of active rights”).

In addition, on March 24, 2016, the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for a provisional disposition prohibiting the infringement of service mark rights (Seoul Central District Court 2016Kahap80363, hereinafter “instant provisional disposition”), which prohibits the Plaintiff from using the mark “G” (hereinafter “instant provisional disposition”). On April 7, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for a trial against the Defendant for invalidation of the instant service mark (hereinafter “instant invalidation trial”) against the Defendant.

In the instant provisional disposition case, the decision dismissing the instant provisional disposition application was rendered on June 15, 2016 on the ground that the portion of “G” constitutes a conspicuous geographical name widely known to consumers or traders, and the Defendant appealed against it on June 21, 2016.

E. Meanwhile, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal on the other hand on January 2016.