logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.08 2016노1646
채무자회생및파산에관한법률위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles);

A. The case where a custodian is required to obtain permission from the court when taking over the debtor's property pursuant to Article 61 (2) 1 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act refers to either the property included in the list prepared by the custodian at the time of the commencement of the rehabilitation procedure, or the property wholly incorporated into the debtor's property during the

On the other hand, since trademark law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter "China") takes the earlier application principle and the registration principle, trademark registration procedure is not completed as property.

Therefore, the defendant's acquisition of the trademark right (hereinafter "E") by D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "D") under registration application does not require the court's permission to acquire the trademark of this case. Thus, it does not constitute an act of acquiring the debtor's property without the court's permission.

B. In addition, the defendant did not intend to acquire the trademark of this case without the permission of the court since he did not file an application for transfer for the purpose of changing the applicant's name, not for the purpose of acquiring the trademark of this case from D but for the purpose of transferring the trademark of this case for the purpose of transferring the applicant.

In other words, the defendant is not allowed to be intentional.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the following facts are acknowledged.

① On June 1, 2012, D applied for the registration of the instant trademark under its name.

(Registration Number F). (2) On January 8, 2013, there was a decision to commence rehabilitation as to D, and the Defendant was appointed as a custodian on the same day (Seoul Central District Court 2012 Gohap256).

(3) The defendant moves to the trademark country of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "China") around March 12, 2013.

arrow