beta
Text
The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on April 29, 2019 on the case No. 2017 Won5591 shall be revoked.
The costs of lawsuit.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. 1) The Plaintiff’s trademark “” (hereinafter “instant applied trademark”) as indicated in B(b) below.
(2) On September 20, 2017, the board of examiners of the Korean Intellectual Property Office filed an application for trademark registration on the ground that “The trademark of this case constitutes Article 7(1)12 of the former Trademark Act (amended by Act No. 1403, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same)” with the Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter the same) published the application for trademark registration and published the application for trademark registration. The trademark of this case is similar to the trademark of this case, which is recognized as a trademark of a specific person among consumers in relation to “cosmetic, etc.” as at the time of the application, and the designated goods are identical or similar to the goods of the pre-use trademark, and thus, the trademark examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office decided that “the trademark of this case falls under Article 7(1)12 of the former Trademark Act” with the intent to obtain unfair profits by taking advantage of the reputation of the pre-use trademark, and the trademark examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office applied for trademark registration decision of this case on the same ground.
3) On November 20, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a petition for an appeal against the aforementioned decision of refusal with the Intellectual Property Tribunal(2017 won591). 4) On April 29, 2019, the Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered a trial ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on the purport that “The trademark applied in this case is similar to the pre-use trademark recognized as indicating the goods of a specific person by German consumers or traders, and applied for registration with unjust purposes, such as taking advantage of the reputation of the pre-use trademark, and thus, it cannot be registered as falling under Article 7(1)12 of the former Trademark Act.”
(hereinafter referred to as “the instant trial decision”). (b) The instant trial decision.