1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The registration number 1)/ the filing date of the instant registered service mark / the filing date of the application : The former gender on January 13, 2009 (No. 193583// January 22, 2010: 3): the designated service business (attached Form 2): The holder of the right to registration is entitled to registration (attached Form 2).

B. On June 4, 2015, the Defendant filed a petition with the Intellectual Property Tribunal for a trial against the Plaintiff regarding the cancellation of the registration of the instant registered service mark [Attachment 1] out of the designated service business of this case [Attachment 1] under Article 73 (1) 3 of the former Trademark Act (wholly amended by Act No. 1403, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply], asserting that “The registered service mark of this case was not used in relation to the designated service business of this case for three or more consecutive years before the date of the petition for trial, and that “the Plaintiff does not prove that the registered service mark of this case was not used in relation to the designated service business of this case for three or more years before the date of the petition for trial.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff, the holder of the instant registered service mark, is DMF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “DMF”), around August 2010.

B. On May 23, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a non-exclusive license agreement on the instant registered service mark, and DMF Co., Ltd.