The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 through 3, Article 23(1) of the Commercial Act provides that "no person shall use a trade name that may be mistaken for another person's business for unjust purposes," and the purport of the above provision is to prevent public mistake and confusion in the general trade market, to protect trust in this regard, and to protect the interests of mutual right holders to use a trade name distinct from the trade name of another person.

In determining whether a trade name constitutes "a trade name that may be mistaken for the business of another" in light of the legislative intent above, the whole trade names shall be compared and observed in order to comprehensively consider whether a trade name constitutes "a trade name that may be mistaken for the business of another person," where the business nature, content, business method, customer floor, etc. of each trade name are closely related to one another, and the general public considers that the two business entities are related to one another, or whether the trade name of another is widely known and thus,

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da73879 Decided February 26, 2002, etc.). In addition, the term "illegal purpose" as referred to in the above provision refers to an unlawful intent in which a general person misleads another person as to his/her own business in his/her trade name, thereby obtaining unjust profits, or causing losses to another person, by using a name as his/her own trade name, and thereby inducing the general person to misunderstand the business of another person as indicated in his/her trade name. Whether there exists an unlawful purpose should be determined by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, such as reputation, credit, type and method of business

The judgment below

According to the reasons, the court below is prior to the change of the Plaintiff’s trade name “A” corporation (ICO., LTPP) and “A”.