Criteria for determining whether an application for trademark registration is permissible;

In the approval book of an application for trademark registration, the same or similarity of goods which intend to use the trademark with the same or similarity of the trademark should be judged, and the trademark "SHFIED" as the cited trademark "cellule" is similar to the trademark "PHEFIED", and as a whole, it is impossible for ordinary consumers to clearly distinguish both trademarks in the transaction, and the designated goods of both trademarks are not in conflict with some of them, so they cannot be registered.

Article 9(1)7 of the Trademark Act

Patent Attorney Choi Jae-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant-appellant

The Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office

Korean Intellectual Property Office Decision 458 No. 458 dated October 29, 1980

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by a claimant.

The grounds of appeal are examined by claimant's representative.

According to Article 9(1)7 of the Trademark Act, trademarks identical with or similar to the registered trademark of an earlier application, which are used on goods identical or similar to the designated goods of the earlier application, are prohibited from being registered. Therefore, in the granting of an application for registration, the same or similarity of goods intending to use the trademark should be determined together with the same or similarity of the trademark, and even if the trademark itself is similar, the trademark itself is registered when the goods intended to use it are not similar.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below held that the trademark of this source is a character trademark marked as "Selfeder" in English and composed of Category 38, Boli-man, Boli-si, Boli-si, Boli-si, Troper, Epirythry, Epiry, and HIED as designated goods, and the cited trademark is marked as "SHFIED" in English, and its cited trademark is marked as "SHFIED" in the designated goods, and it is confirmed that the above trademark is marked as only in English, and this trademark is similar to the trademark "Selfeder", and its cited trademark is not identical to the trademark in trade, and it is not identical to the designated goods in accordance with the former part of the above Article 38 and its purport that some of the designated goods are not identical to those of the designated goods, but it can be seen that there is no violation of the law of the court below's decision of the court below as to the designated goods of this category 8.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jung-soo (Presiding Justice) and Lee Jong-young's Lee Jong-young