Whether “prefabricated house” in Chapter 53 of the product classification, which is the designated goods of the registered trademark, and “materials for Exclusive Use or Construction” in Chapter 33 of the product classification, which is the designated goods of the pre-registered trademark, are the same and similar (affirmative)

The designated goods of a registered trademark "prefabricated house" means a house which is completed by manufacturing each part of the floor, roof, walls, openings, equipment, etc. of a house in a factory and transporting most of them to the site in the construction site only after the assembly is completed or the factory is assembled. As such, it should be interpreted that "prefabricated house" and "materials for exclusive use or building", which are the designated goods of a registered trademark, are in the relation of a finished product and parts, and are used for the purpose of a house. In quality, the construction materials are the same as a building business operator or a general consumer, and most of the construction materials are constructed by a building business operator or a factory are assembled, and the construction materials are assembled into one house using materials for exclusive use or building in the construction site. Thus, in light of the concept of goods under the Trademark Act, it should be interpreted that "prefabricated house" and "materials for exclusive use or building" which are the designated goods of a registered trademark, which are the designated goods of a registered trademark, are divided into two categories 3 and 3 different goods under the Trademark Act as amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Intellectual Property Administration and Home Affairs.

Articles 7(1)7 and 10 of the Trademark Act

Patent Attorney Na-hwan et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant and one other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellant)

Patent Attorney Lee Jae-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Korean Intellectual Property Office Appeal Trial Office 282 dated January 31, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the respondent.

We examine the grounds of appeal by the appellant.

The lower court determined that the trademark is a character trademark consisting of so-called “SIP RE” and “small Franchis” under the Trademark Act, which consists of 14797 on October 2, 1987, and that the trademark is composed of 3 separate goods from those of the 53 categories of the goods, and that the trademark is identical to those of the 33 categories of the goods in the construction site to be used as designated goods. In light of the above, the lower court determined that the trademark is identical to those of the 3 categories of the goods in the construction site to be used as the 4th category of the goods, and that most of the goods are identical or similar to those of the 3 categories of the goods in the construction site to be used as the 4th category of the goods in the construction site to be used as the 5th category of the goods. In so doing, the lower court determined that the trademark is identical or similar to those of the goods in the construction site to be used as the 3th category of goods in the construction site to be used as the 60th category of goods.

According to relevant evidence and records, the above recognition judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and it cannot be deemed that there is any error in the reasoning or inconsistency in the reasoning, such as the theory of lawsuit, in the original decision. Therefore, there is no reason to discuss.

Therefore, the appeal by the respondent is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)