logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 특허법원 2020.06.18 2019허8521
등록무효(상)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

(a) The Defendant’s registered service mark 1) registration number/ application date/registration date: Service mark registration C/D/E 2): 3 designated service business: Education and research business, preparation and proceeding business for educational events, teaching materials business, news reporting business, real estate management business, private teaching institute business, newspaper publishing business, satellite telecommunications, Internet education lecture business, Internet education and guidance business, Internet education and instruction business, Internet, online publication business for reading-only online, reading-only online book and magazine publication business, communications lecture business;

(b) The Plaintiff’s registered trademark and service mark 1) / the filing date of the application / the filing date of the earlier registered service mark / the filing date of the earlier registered service mark : Trademark registrationF/G/H/Re-registration date: (c) recorded tapes (excluding those in which music is recorded), recorded tapes (excluding those in which music is recorded), newspapers, magazines, picture-making books, painting, stampers, carbling, painting, painting, 2) registration number / the filing date of the earlier registered service mark / the filing date of the earlier registered service mark : Private Teaching Institutes, private teaching institutes, private teaching institutes, advertising and rental business, Internet advertising and management information provision business, commercial management information provision business, Internet information provision business, Internet information provision business, Internet information provision business, Internet data provision business, Internet information collection business, Internet information provision business, Internet data collection business, Internet information collection business, Internet information provision business, 10th of October 21, 2010: classified service mark 35.

C. On October 17, 2018, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant registered service mark falls under any of subparagraphs 7, 9, and 11 of Article 34(1) of the Trademark Act in relation to the pre-registered trademark and the pre-registered service mark, and that the instant registered service mark falls under any of subparagraphs 7, 9, and 11 of the aforesaid Article.

arrow