1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 6, 2015, the Plaintiff Company: (a) rendered the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board No. 2015Da5184 against the Defendant on November 6, 2015; (b) the Defendant’s registered service mark as indicated in the foregoing paragraph was not used in the Republic of Korea for at least three consecutive years before the date of a petition for trial by a registered service right holder, an exclusive licensee, or a non-exclusive licensee on the designated service business; and (b) thus, the Defendant’s registered service mark was not used in the Republic of Korea on the designated service business; and

(2) On November 23, 2016, the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board rejected the Plaintiff Company’s appeal on the ground that “The registered service mark of this case is recognized to have been properly used in the restaurant chain business, etc., which is a designated service business in Korea within three years prior to the date on which the Plaintiff Company’s registration was requested, and thus does not fall under Article 73(1)3 of the former Trademark Act.”

(b) The Defendant’s registration number/application date/registration date of the instant registered service mark: The Defendant’s registered service mark registration number/registration date: cafeteria/D/E composition: the restaurant business, food cooking agency business, fashion restaurant, theater food store business, food presentation business, general restaurant business, food procurement business, 【founded ground for recognition’, and the purport of the entire pleadings, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Whether the trial decision of this case is unlawful

가. 이 사건의 쟁점 원고 회사가 이 사건 등록서비스표를 이 사건 등록취소심판청구일 전 3년 이내에 국내에서 지정서비스업 중 ‘식당체인업’에 해당하는 ‘F’ 떡볶이 분식점 가맹업(이하 ‘이 사건 가맹업’이라 한다)에 사용하였음은 당사자 사이에 다툼이 없으므로, 이 사건 등록서비스표가 구 상표법 제73조 제1항 제3호에 해당하는지는 원고 회사가 이 사건...