1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on July 3, 2015 by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on the case shall be revoked.

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

1. Basic facts

(a) The Plaintiff’s registered trademark 1) filing date/registration date//registration number: B/ C/D2: 3 Designated goods: administrations, horse ridings, te-ridings, Category 25 of the Products Classification; Te-C-D2.

B. On August 18, 2014, the Defendant asserted that “The registered trademark of this case is not used in the Republic of Korea for three or more consecutive years prior to the filing date of the request for the revocation trial without justifiable cause, the registration must be revoked pursuant to Article 73(1)3 of the Trademark Act” against the Plaintiff at the Intellectual Property Tribunal (hereinafter “Patent Tribunal”) on August 18, 2014, and that “The registered trademark of this case shall not be used in the Republic of Korea for administration, Trts, Ilking, Skying, scarp, scarp, scarp, leather, and swimming clothes from among the designated goods.” 2) The Intellectual Property Tribunal reviewed the above request for the revocation trial on July 3, 2015.

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

2. Of the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case, the purport of the plaintiff's assertion, the decision of this case was unlawful even if the goods for which the revocation trial was requested, were used domestically within three years before the date the revocation trial of this case was requested by the plaintiff, and the registration of this case was not revoked.

3. Whether Article 73(1)3 of the Trademark Act applies to the registered trademark of this case

A. In addition to the overall purport of the pleadings, the following facts may be acknowledged in each description and image of Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 14:

1) A person who obtained permission for the use of the instant registered trademark from the Plaintiff or the Plaintiff included a picture of 2012, which is the designated goods of the instant registered trademark, and the pictures of 2012, on which the mark “” was attached, and produced and distributed books and leaflets for 2012, in which clothes and painting’s photographs are recorded, and the mark “” was attached (this refers to this).