Criteria for determining the confusion of goods marked by containers and signs;

Whether or not any goods listed on the container or sign are confused shall be determined by opening each container and its mark, observing it in a general, general, and separately.

Articles 2 and 4 of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act

Korea Johson Co.

Defendant corporation

Seoul District Court Branch of Seoul District Court (85Gahap1656)

1. Revocation of the part of the original judgment against the plaintiff quoted next in the original judgment.

The defendant shall not use a mark saw-shaped figure overlaps on the diagrams of a saw-shaped shape on the container of the attached photograph 1, and shall not sell a luminous luminous system for households using the same mark.

2. The plaintiff's remaining appeal is dismissed.

3. The costs of the first and second trials shall be borne by the defendant.

The original judgment shall be revoked.

The defendant shall not use the indication specified in paragraph (1) of the main text in the container of the attached photograph 1, and shall not sell the luminous system for households with the same mark as that of the defendant's factory, warehouse, office, or agent. The defendant shall destroy the container of luminous system for households with the same mark as that of the defendant's factory, warehouse, office, or agent.

The costs of lawsuit in the first and second instances shall be borne by the defendant and a declaration of provisional execution.

The facts that the plaintiff manufactured and sold the above 1 rayet No. 5 (foreign investment) with the 10th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 1st 1st 96th 1st 1st 6th 6th 6th 3th 6th 6th 6th 6th 3th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6.

However, if the above Gap evidence Nos. 1-2, 9 and 10 are gathered to see each image of each of the above 1-2, 9 and 10, the shape of each of the above containers used by the defendant is identical to the original part of the original unit with the container of the press box of this case, and the shape of each of the above containers is identical to that of the plaintiff's 1-2, lids, capacity, and surface marked on the top of the original unit. The shape of each of the above containers, which are similar to the above 1-2, 10-2, are identical to that of the 2-2,00-2,00-2, and the shape of the 2-2,00-2,000-2, which is marked on the top of the front part of the 1-2,00-3,000-2, which is identical to the above 1-3,000-2,000-2,000-2.

In addition, the plaintiff asserts that the defendant's trademark of this case in the defendant's factory, warehouse, office, and agency is seeking the destruction of the luminous unit container for the household of this case, but there is no proof as to the plaintiff's right to seek the destruction of the above container. Thus, the above assertion is no longer necessary to make any further determination.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant seeking the prohibition of the use of the above mark and the sale of the luminous system for households using the containers on which the above mark is indicated, shall be accepted with merit, and the remaining claims shall be dismissed with merit. Since the original judgment has dismissed all the plaintiff's claim with different conclusions, part of the plaintiff's appeal shall be accepted, and the part against the plaintiff within the above cited scope of the original judgment shall be revoked, and the defendant shall be prohibited from the above act among the original judgment, and the remaining appeal of the plaintiff shall be dismissed without merit, and the provisional execution shall be dismissed with the application of the proviso of Articles 96, 89, and 92 of the Civil Procedure Act and the provisional execution shall not be declared, and this decision shall be delivered

[Attachment]

Judges Jeon Soo-soo (Presiding Judge)