1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is “A. The Plaintiff is a company running the business of hosting pregnancy, childbirth, and child care education exhibitions, and the Defendant also runs the same kind of business as the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff was established on January 21, 2008, and since around 2008, the Plaintiff holds pregnancy, childbirth, child care, and education exhibitions with the trade name “beatfin”. (c) The Defendant, established on November 9, 201, held post-exploitation, “befin” in the vicinity of the Plaintiff’s event site, and held a post-exploitation, childbirth, child care, and education exhibition, and on the Defendant’s homepage, used the name “befinbin,” and interfered with the Plaintiff’s business by placing a banner with the Defendant’s direction on the Defendant’s event site. The Defendant’s above act was prohibited pursuant to Article 2 subparag. 1(b) of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (hereinafter “the Unfair Competition Prevention Act”).

2. Article 2(b) of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act provides that “an act that causes confusion with another person’s business facilities or activities by using signs identical or similar to another person’s name, trade name, or emblem widely known in the Republic of Korea and other signs indicating another person’s business” as one of the unfair competition acts.

The term "mark indicating that a person's business is widely known in the Republic of Korea" means a mark indicating "a person's business, which is widely known in the Republic of Korea," which is a case where the traders or consumers distinguish a specific business from another business through it, within a certain scope, from the domestic discharge or within a certain scope." The period, method, pattern, quantity of use, scope of transaction, etc., and whether it is objectively widely known under the generally accepted social norms