logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 특허법원 2020.03.13 2019허6846
등록무효(상)
Text

1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on August 12, 2019 by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on the case shall be revoked.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The registration of the instant registered trademark (A No. 1) 1 / the filing date of the trademark registration number / the registration date / the registration date: C/D/ E/2 May 22, 2013) among the designated goods of the instant registered trademark: (i) the registered trademark of this case became final and conclusive and conclusive on May 9, 2018 that the registration of the instant registered trademark would be revoked. The registration was revoked in entirety due to the transfer of rights from the Plaintiff (FF obtained the registration of the instant registered trademark on February 1, 2017; and (ii) the Plaintiff completed the registration of the transfer of rights from G on the grounds of the transfer of rights from the FF on February 1, 2017.

B. 1) Former marks of prior use 1: The Plaintiff newly added 3 marks of prior use from the pleading materials on February 6, 2020, as well as 3 users, such as the processed chills, chills, and c c c c sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc sc s

C. The trial decision of this case (Evidence 2) 1 of Article 7 (1) 11 of the former Trademark Act (amended by Act No. 1403, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same) is applicable to Article 7 (1) 11 of the former Trademark Act, since the Plaintiff is a trademark used for illegal purposes as a trademark similar to the 1, 2, which is known as the Plaintiff’s mark at the time of filing an application for the registration of the trademark of this case, against the Defendant who is the trademark holder of the trademark of this case. The Patent Tribunal requested a trial for invalidation of the registration of the trademark of this case by asserting that “The registered trademark of this case shall be invalidated because it falls under Article 7 (1) 12 of the former Trademark Act, since it is a trademark used for illegal purposes.”

arrow