1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on October 24, 2017 by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on the case No. 2660 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 August 23, 2017, the Defendant filed a petition against the Plaintiff for a trial to confirm the scope of the right of the instant registered trademark 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, and that it does not fall under the scope of the instant registered trademark. 2) The Intellectual Property Tribunal deliberated the instant petition for a trial with the number of 2017Da2660, and on October 24, 2017, the Defendant’s challenged mark is not similar to the Plaintiff’s registered trademark, and thus, the Defendant’s challenged mark does not fall under the scope of the Plaintiff’s registered trademark’s right of the goods and designated goods (hereinafter “instant trial decision”).

【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.