1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. The court's explanation concerning this case shall refer to the reasons for the judgment of the first instance pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

However, the first instance court's 7th to 13th of the 7th court's decision shall be followed as follows.

2. Parts to be dried;

A. Although the Plaintiff’s acquisition and exercise of the right to registered trademark of this case was for the purpose of unfair competition and thus constitutes abuse of rights, the Plaintiff did not acquire the right to registered trademark of this case for the purpose of distinguishing one’s goods from the goods of another enterpriser, but acquired the right to registered trademark of this case in bad faith for the purpose of making profits by causing ordinary consumers to confused with the Defendant’s business facilities or activities. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s exercise of the right to registered trademark of this case against the Defendant after the acquisition of the right to registered trademark of this case is for the purpose of unfair competition, and thus cannot be allowed as it is for the purpose of distinguishing one’s goods from another’s goods, not for the purpose of distinguishing one’s goods from another’s goods, but for the purpose of gaining profits by using a trademark identical or similar to another’s trademark widely used domestically. Thus, if the Plaintiff acquired the trademark of this case for the purpose of earning profits by using the trademark of this case, it itself is for the purpose of unfair competition, and even if it satisfies the right to use domestic goods, it cannot be seen as legitimate exercise of the right by 401.