Whether the applied trademark " and the cited trademark "" are similar (affirmative)

The trademark " and the cited trademark" are different in the appearance, but the applied trademark consists of two elements such as "euro" and "sensse", and it can be recognized by the part "euro" or "sensse" or by the part "sensse" in today's commercial transactions, the practice of which is simple and speedy. In case where "sensse" is recognized by the part "sensse", the trademark is identical to the cited trademark, and if two trademarks are used in the same designated goods, it may cause general consumers or traders to mistake and confuse the place of goods, so the applied trademark is similar to the cited trademark.

Article 7 (1) 7 of the Trademark Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1561 (Gong1990, 1371) (Law No.1990, 1371) and 90Hu1734 (Gong1991, 1294) decided March 27, 1991 (Gong1991, 2038)

Attorney Ahn Young-ro, Counsel for the applicant

The Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office

Korean Intellectual Property Office Decision 196 dated April 30, 1991

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the applicant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The similarity of trademarks shall be determined by a method of objectively, overall, and separately observing the external appearance, name, and concept of two trademarks used for the same or similar goods, and determining whether there is a possibility of mistake or confusion between the goods in the transaction at any time. Even if there are different parts between the trademarks, if it is easy for them to confuse because their names or concepts are similar, they shall be deemed similar trademarks (see Supreme Court Decision 87Hu36, Jun. 23, 1987; Supreme Court Decision 89Hu1561, May 22, 1990).

According to the reasoning of the original trial decision, the court below judged that the cited trademark marked as "the original trademark marked as "the goods" and in English and the cited trademark marked as "the goods" are different in appearance, but the original trademark is composed of two elements, and it can be perceived by the part "the goods" or by the part "the goods" in today's commercial transactions, which practice simple and speedy, and in case where it is recognized by the part "the goods", the two trademarks are identical to the cited trademark "the goods" and if they are used for the designated goods, they may cause general consumers or traders to mistake or confuse the goods place. In light of the records, the court below's decision is just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as otherwise alleged.

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 Yong-sung (Presiding Justice)