1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

(a) The trademark registration number/filing date/registration date of the instant registered trademark (A No. 3) 1)/ the trademark registration number/registration date: C/D/E2) previous designated goods (C/D/E2) : Mazine social errors in Chapter 03 of the classification of the product: Mazine, and Mazine social errors in human body, flacccing and flacing dates, skincings, skinecings, paints and fashingscingscingscing, mecing, mecing, cosmetics, cosmetics for bath, cosmetic, cosmeticscing, fladscing, fladscing, dyscing, szine-makingcing, skbine-making, cosmetic for children, fladscing, and flaz 4): Plaintiff 5: Exclusive licensee

(Creation Date: August 13, 2018)

B. On February 25, 2019, the defendant claimed that "the registered trademark of this case is not used in the Republic of Korea for three or more consecutive years prior to the filing date of the request for the revocation trial on all the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case by either the owner of the trademark right, exclusive licensee, or non-exclusive licensee," and filed a request for the revocation trial on the trademark registration under Article 119 (1) 3 of the Trademark Act. (2) The Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal deliberated on the above request for the revocation trial on May 9, 2019, and on May 9, 2019, "the data submitted by the plaintiff in the procedure for the revocation trial cannot be deemed to have been properly used in the Republic of Korea within three years prior to the filing date of the request for the revocation trial on the ground that the registered trademark of this case cannot be deemed to have been properly used in the Republic of Korea by any one of the designated goods of the designated goods of this case."

【Reasons for Recognition】 Evidence No. 3, Evidence No. 4-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff, through F, indicated the instant registered trademark within three years from the date of appeal via the exclusive licensee, the Chinese company.