1. The Defendant’s KRW 27,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from June 15, 2017 to November 1, 2017, and the following.

1. Facts of premise;

A. The Plaintiff’s trade name registration and trademark right 1) The Plaintiff’s trade name on December 24, 1988 is the “Stock Company’s Republic of Korea” (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s trade name”).

) Accordingly, the location of the head office was established under Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Guro-dong 604-1 29 dong-dong 121, and the purpose of business was non-ferrous metal wholesale retail and retail sales business, etc. 2) The Plaintiff has the trademark registration number (No. 0698019) registered on February 13, 2007, which was applied on April 14, 2006 for the trademark mark "".

B. The Defendant’s trade name change and its use, etc. 1) on April 12, 2006. The Defendant established the trade name “stock company’s mother massageing” with the trade name on November 5, 2007. (2) The Defendant deleted group meal service business, mobile negative food business, urban development business, etc. from the business purpose to add box retail business, tin-sale wholesale and retail business, tin-to-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s

3) Afterwards, the Defendant indicated the name of the Defendant on the transaction statement of the pressure materials, the name of the Defendant’s employee, and the Defendant’s factory outer wall, etc. (C) The dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. On July 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant claiming damages of KRW 200 million for the reason of “unfair competition act from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2013” along with the discontinuance of use of the Defendant’s trade name, Plaintiff’s trademark right and service mark right infringement prohibition, and the destruction of the Defendant’s infringement creation.

On August 22, 2014, a judgment was rendered to dismiss all the above claims.

The trade name of the plaintiff and the defendant are identical or similar to each other.