206Heo428 Nullification of Registration (D)

Freeboard

Suwon Hongcheon-gun Group

Patent Attorney Kim Jong-nam, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Ora Company, Inc.

Geumcheon-gu Seoul

Maximum number of the representative director;

Patent Attorney Seo-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

April 21, 2006

May 19, 2006

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on December 1, 2005 on the case No. 1170 of 2005 is revoked.

1. Details of the trial decision;

A. The Defendant filed a petition for a trial on invalidation of registration against the Plaintiff on the ground that the registered design of the instant case as described below was used in a consignment container sold domestically prior to the filing of the application, and was similar to the comparable design 1 or the Trademark Gazette published prior to the filing of the application as described in the following sub-paragraph (c). The Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal accepted the above claim and rendered a trial decision of this case accepting the Defendant’s claim on the ground that the registered design of the instant case constitutes grounds for invalidation of registration under Article 5(1) of the former Design Act (amended by Act No. 7289, Dec. 31, 2004; hereinafter the same).

B. The registration number of the registered design (1) of this case: the filing date of No. 361895 (2)/ the registration date: the essential point of the creation of the design on June 15, 2004 / (3) September 3, 2004: For the goods subject to the design, the description of the design “Sbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbg” that is the combination of shapes, shapes, and colors expressed on the surface specified in attached Table 1: the materials are synthetic resin or paper, and the materials are attached to the packaging bottle for medicinal herbs, such as medicinal poles, grains, and fermentation, or the outer annual installments of factoring. The comparative design (1) was used in a container manufactured and sold by the Plaintiff for comparative design (1) and is the photograph specified in attached Table 2.

(2) The owner of a trademark is the defendant, who is publicly announced as the trademark registration number No. 479051 on July 1, 2000 of the comparable design, and the designated goods are the defendant, and the designated goods are "recognis, Cheongju, Cheongju, Magju, Magju, Magju, Magju, Magju, Magju, Magju, Magju, and Magju." The mark is as shown in the attached Table 3.

【Evidence: Evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the trial decision

A. The summary of the grounds for the revocation of the Plaintiff’s claim (1) is that the Plaintiff used the comparative design 1 on the consigned container after the application of the instant registered design. Thus, the comparative design 1 cannot be deemed to constitute a design publicly notified before the application of the instant registered design.

( 2 ) 비교대상디자인 2는 상표로서 이 사건 등록디자인의 대상 물품인 표딱지와 동일성이 없는 물품이다. 또한 이 사건 등록디자인의 물품인 표딱지는 병의 외주연부에 감아서 부착하는 방식으로 사용되는 것이어서, 그 형상이 평면의 긴 직사각형의 형태로 될 수밖에 없고, 여백부에 상하 또는 좌우로 굵고 가는 띠가 형성되고 어느 방향에서나 그 내용을 인식할 수 있도록 하기 위해서 동일한 모양이 2회 연속하여 배열되는 것이 일반적이며, 통상 시원하다는 이미지를 주는 색상이 사용되는 것이므로, 그 유사의 범위를 비교적 좁게 보아야 한다. 이 사건 등록디자인의 바탕색이 옅은 하늘색인데 비하여 비교대상디자인 2의 바탕색은 짙은 수박색으로 다르고, 눈에 띠는 요부인 띠에 있어서도 이 사건 등록디자인에는 청색과 황색의 상, 하부 띠와 상부 띠 아래에 적색 , 청색, 적색을 순차 배열한 직사각형의 모양이 사용된 데 비하여 비교대상디자인 2에는 흰색과 은색의 상, 하부 띠와 상부 띠 아래에 청색과 적색의 사다리꼴 모양이 사용되어, 그 시각적 인상과 심미감에 차이가 있다. 결국 이 사건 등록디자인과 비교대상디자인 2가 유사하다고 할 수 없다 .

B. As to whether the registered design of this case and the comparative design 2 are similar, trademark (1) is used mainly by means of printing, singing, singing, packing, labelling, etc. of the product itself or by other methods, and as to the comparative design 2 as designated goods, it is generally used in the form of breathing table like the goods subject to the registered design of this case, and thus, the design of this case and the comparative design 2 constitute a design for the same and similar goods under social norms. (2) The design refers to the shape, pattern, color, or a combination thereof, which causes an aesthetic impression through visual view, not separately comparing each element constituting the design, but depending on whether visual impressions are similar to those that may be raised from the perspective of persons who view the overall appearance of the design through comparison and observation, and if the overall characteristics of the design are somewhat similar, it should be deemed as similar to the overall characteristics of the design.

이 사건 등록디자인과 비교대상디자인 2를 대비하여 보건대, 이 사건 등록디자인과 비교대상디자인 2는 전체적인 디자인의 형상과 모양에 있어서, ① 모두 직사각형의 테두리 안에 상부는 진하고 하부로 갈수록 옅어지는 바탕색이 사용되었고, 그 바탕색 또한 하늘색 ( 이 사건 등록디자인 ) 과 수박색 ( 비교대상디자인 2 ) 으로 색감이 유사한 점 , ② 상, 하부의 2개의 띠와 하부 띠 위에 2개의 작은 직사각형 모양이 배치된 것이 공통되고, 상부 띠 바로 아래에 2개의 직사각형 ( 이 사건 등록디자인 ) 또는 사다리꼴 ( 비교대상디자인 2 ) 의 유사한 모양이 배치되고 모두 청색과 적색이 사용된 점 등에서 서로 유사하며, 원고가 주장하는 바와 같은 바탕색과 상부 띠 아래에 배치된 모양의 차이는 보는 사람의 주의를 끌기 어려운 미세한 차이 또는 상업적인 변경에 불과한 것으로 판단되므로, 이 사건 등록디자인과 비교대상디자인 2는 전체적으로 대비 관찰할 때 느껴지는 심미감에서 별다른 차이가 없는 유사한 디자인에 해당한다 .

【Evidence: Evidence No. 1 to 3, Evidence No. 7, Evidence No. 1 to 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings】

Thus, 2 of the registered design of this case and the comparative design of this case are similar, and subject thereto.

Since the registered design of this case is identical to the registered design of this case, it is not necessary to examine the Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no use of comparative design 1 prior to the application of the registered design of this case. Thus, the registered design of this case should be invalidated as it falls under Article 5(1)3 of the former Design Act. Thus, the trial decision of this case, which same conclusion, is legitimate.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Sung-ho

Judges Oh Jin-jin

Judges Han Han-chul

Site of separate sheet

1. The registered design of this case;

2. Compared design 1;

A person shall be appointed.

3. Compared design 2;

A person shall be appointed.