1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

(a) The filing date and registration date/registration number of the Defendant’s registered trademark (Evidence 1) of this case : C/D/E for the removal of each quality of the Class 3 designated goods: C/D/E 2); Meck for Meck-type cream; Meck-type cosmetics; Meck-type cosmetics; cosmeticck-type cosmetics; cosmetic-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-

(b) Pre-use trademark/service mark 1) Gu : Product service business: Cosmetics and cosmetics sales business;

C. On January 19, 2015, the Plaintiff’s trial decision of this case (Evidence A4 No. 1) constitutes not only Article 7(1)11 of the former Trademark Act (amended by Act No. 1403, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter “former Trademark Act”) but also Article 7(1)11 of the former Trademark Act (amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter “ODM”) of the Defendant and the Plaintiff’s previous ODM were the abbreviation of “manufacturer Development Method”, which is often translated as “manufacturer Development Method”, and if the orderer entrusts the manufacture of the product to the manufacturer, the manufacturer shall develop and manufacture the product and deliver it to the manufacturer, and the order distributor shall sell the product.

In other words, unlike "OEM (OEM)" which simply produces and supplies goods according to the design drawings provided by the orderer, the manufacturer will produce and supply the goods in the lead at the request of the orderer.

In light of manufacturing process trading, Article 7 (1) 12 of the former Trademark Act is also applicable.