1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on October 24, 2017 by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on a case No. 2015 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Basic facts

A. The registered trademark 1)/ the filing date/registration date/registration number: On June 16, 2001, 14/ 2003.14/14/539270 2): Designated goods: Class 32 of the classification of goods: The owner of the trademark right, such as “breging for drink, red ginseng, red ginseng xx, carbon acid, beer, etc.”

(b) Composition of a challenged mark 1: 2) Goods using red ginseng, red ginseng, red ginseng, red ginseng ginseng, red ginseng xx, red ginseng ginseng, red ginseng cans, red ginseng cans, red ginseng for beverage, red ginseng, red ginseng for beverage, and 3 users of red ginseng for beverage: Defendant;

C. 1) On July 13, 2017, the Defendant filed a request for a trial to confirm the scope of the right of the instant registered trademark against the Plaintiff on the grounds that the Defendant’s challenged mark is not similar to the instant registered trademark, and that the Defendant’s challenged mark does not fall under the scope of the right of the instant registered trademark as the designated goods. 2) The Intellectual Property Tribunal deliberated the instant request for a trial as the number of 2017Da2215, and decided October 24, 2017, on the ground that the Defendant’s challenged mark is not similar to the Plaintiff’s registered trademark and the mark is not similar to the Plaintiff’s registered trademark, and thus, the Defendant’s above trial decision (hereinafter “instant trial decision”) was rendered by the Defendant on the grounds that it does not fall under the scope of the Plaintiff’s registered trademark’s right of the goods and designated goods.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination as to the propriety of the instant trial decision

A. The gist of the parties’ assertion 1 and the challenged mark of the Plaintiff 1 are both the Plaintiff’s registered trademark and the challenged mark are mainly composed of ginseng roots shapes. In common, the appearance and concept of “the shape of two persons who are considered to be a horse and seated” is similar when compared with the overall ethic observation.

Nevertheless, the instant adjudication was accepted by the Defendant on the ground that the challenged mark does not fall under the scope of the right of the registered trademark of this case.