Whether the application trademark "TRIPLE CRWN" and the cited trademark "CRWN + CRWN" are similar (affirmative)

The "TRIPLE" or "CROWN" of the applied trademark is a basic English language that is commonly used. Since the term "TRIPLE" can be recognized as the "three kings," the main part of the applied trademark can be said to be the "CRWN" simply means the "CRWN," even if the applied trademark is used in the sports sector as three kings, the "CROWN" itself can be interpreted as the "TRLE" and the "CRWN" can not be seen as simply combining the "TRRE" and the "CRWN" as an independent concept that is more than the meaning of "three kings," it is difficult to see that it does not interfere with the essential part of the trademark for which the application is made, and therefore there is no concern that it would interfere with the KOWN's use of the designated goods as the "CRWN" and the "CROWN" in the same way as the designated goods for which the application is made.

Article 7 (1) 7 of the Trademark Act

Doz. (Patent Attorney Song Jae-soo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office

Patent Court Decision 2001Heo1303 delivered on July 6, 2001

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to the Patent Court.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, since general consumers or traders of the designated goods of the applied trademark of this case can easily recognize the "TRIPLE CRN" of this case as '3 king', the trademark of this case can be seen as forming an independent new concept because the trademark of this case is separated from 'TTRIPE' and 'CRWN' and 'CRWN' and 'CRWN' are separated from 'TriWN' as '1 cited trademark of this case' or 'TriW' as 'Tripa', 'the trademark of this case is called 'TRIPLE' and 'TriWN' as 'Tripa', 'the trademark of this case' and 'the trademark of this case' as 'Tri-pa' and 'the trademark of this case' as 'Tri-pa', 'the trademark of this case' and 'the trademark of this case' as 'the trademark of this case' and 'the general 'the 'the ' 'the 'or 'the 't. '2 'the 'the 'the 'the 'the 'the '. 'the '. 'the '. '. '. '. '.'. '. '. '. '. '. '.

However, the "TRIPLE" or "CRWN" is a basic English language commonly used, and it is merely a mere fact that the "TRIPE" of the concept of the drainage or number is simply a mere CRWN, so the essential part of the trademark applied in this case is CRWN, and even if the trademark applied in this case is used in the 3th place in the field of sports, it can be conceptualized that the "CTROWN" itself is the highest honor and normal meaning, so it cannot be deemed that the "TRIPE" and the "CRWN" simply combines it with the CRWN and form a new concept more than the meaning of the "three king," and therefore there is no concern that the trademark applied in this case is used as the part of the trademark applied in this case, and there is no concern that the trademark applied in this case may cause confusion and confusion about the designated goods of this case as the main part of the trademark applied in this case, and there is no possibility that the trademark applied in this case may cause confusion with the designated goods of this case.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the similarity of trademarks, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, in determining that the trademark of this case and the cited trademark 1 are not similar to the trademark of this case. The ground of appeal assigning this error is with merit.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Patent Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Seo-sung (Presiding Justice)