beta
(영문) 특허법원 2016.10.07 2016허4795

권리범위확인(상)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

(a) The Defendant’s registered trademark (A. 1 and 2 No. 1) / The filing date / the registration number: June 20, 2013 / May 27, 2014 / the former sex (No. 10394392) of the instant registered trademark: Cases, etc. for mobile telephone calls, etc., for Class 9 of the classification of goods;

(b) Goods using the Plaintiff’s challenged mark (No. 1-3) 1: 2) : Cases for mobile phones

C. The reasoning of the instant trial decision (A evidence 1, 2) 1) is that the Defendant is a trademark holder of the instant registered trademark, and against the Plaintiff using the challenged mark in the Intellectual Property Tribunal on January 21, 2016, the registered trademark of this case and the challenged mark are identical and similar marks since the title of the trademark of this case and the challenged mark constitutes “tour”, and both the designated goods are identical and similar goods.

Therefore, the challenged mark belongs to the scope of protection of the trademark of this case.

The Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board asserted to the purport that “the registered trademark “” and “mark subject to confirmation” are different from the appearance of the instant registered trademark “,” but the title “top” are the same on June 14, 2016, and thus, if used together with the same or similar goods, it constitutes a similar mark that may cause confusion to ordinary consumers or traders as to the origin of the goods. In addition, the goods using the challenged mark and the designated goods of the registered goods of this case are identical or similar. Accordingly, the challenged mark falls under the scope of protection of the instant registered trademark. For the reasons that the trademark subject to confirmation falls under the scope of protection of the instant registered trademark.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant trial decision

A. For the following reasons, the challenged mark falls within the scope of protection of the instant registered trademark.