logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1975. 1. 28. 선고 74후41 판결
[등록상표무효][집23(1)행,22;공1975.4.1.(509),8316]
Main Issues

Whether the trademark "Santa" is similar to the trademark "FNTA"

Summary of Judgment

A trademark crossing "Santa" and a trademark crossing "FNTA" with a figure of the upper part of "Santa" and "FNTA" cannot be deemed to have a similarity between appearance, concept, and name, and there is no similarity between the two.

Claimant-Appellee

further, legal representative of Cambodia, in the following order:

Appellee, appellant

Patent Attorney Park Jong-chul, Patent Attorney Park Jong-hoon

original decision

On July 3, 1974, the High Court Decision 339 decided July 3, 1973

Text

The original adjudication shall be reversed.

The case shall be remanded to the Patent Office of the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal by the respondent's agent are examined.

According to the original decision and the record, the trademark "No. 18,688" of this case is the trademark "No. 18,68 of this case and the trademark "No. 2 of this case is the same as the trademark "No. 4 of this case," which is the trademark "No. 10,000 in English, and is a combination of letters and diagrams on the right side of the crossing, and the trademark "No. 5 of this case is the trademark "No. 4 of this case and no. 5 of this case is the trademark "No. 5 of this case," and the trademark "No. 4 of this case is the trademark "No. 5 of this case," which is the trademark "No. 2 of this case and no. 5 of this case is the trademark "No. 5 of this case," and the trademark "No. 1960, no. 5 of this case shall be the trademark "no. 197. 17, 1960.

Therefore, this case's trademark and cited trademark cannot be deemed to have similarity even in appearance, concept, and name, and it cannot be deemed to have similaritys between the two even if they are judged comprehensively, and the original decision that the above two trademarks are similar cannot be deemed to have been committed in misunderstanding the legal principles on similarity of trademarks. Therefore, the appeal pointing this out is justified.

Therefore, the original adjudication is reversed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cho Young-young (Presiding Justice)

arrow