The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. No person prosecuted shall infringe on another person's trademark by using a trademark identical or similar to another person's registered trademark on goods identical or similar to the designated goods, and shall sell, distribute, import, or export goods identical or similar to another person's name, trade name, trademark, or any other mark widely known in the Republic of Korea, or sell, distribute, or export goods using such a mark to cause confusion with another person's goods;

Nevertheless, around November 11, 2005, the Defendant registered the individual entrepreneur with the name of “D”, the same as the victim D Co., Ltd. widely known in the Republic of Korea, and opened an Internet website (E) until March 5, 2015, and advertised and sold the Internet site and offline the victim D Co., Ltd. by stealing the “D” trademark registered as G with the F Korean Intellectual Property Office, and indicating the “D”, “D”, “H”, “H” and “H”.

Accordingly, the defendant used the same trademark as another person's registered trademark, and committed an unfair competition act that causes confusion by using another person's trademark widely known in Korea.

2. Determination

A. Whether the designated goods are similar to the designated goods in violation of the Trademark Act shall be determined on the basis of whether the goods are likely to be mistaken for the goods that are manufactured or sold by the same company if they are used in the same or a similar trademark. However, the decision shall be made in accordance with the general transaction norms by comprehensively taking into account the characteristics of the goods themselves, such as quality, shape, use and production, sales sector, scope of consumers, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Hu1086, Aug. 19, 2005; 2003Hu144, Jul. 22, 2004). This court legitimately adopted the goods.