logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.14 2017가합566384
손해배상(지)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 7,589,428 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from September 28, 2017 to December 14, 2018.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s registered design is an individual entrepreneur who produces and sells lighting fixtures under the trade name of “C,” and is the owner of the design right as below.

(B) The following design is “the registered design of this case” and the Plaintiff’s design right to the registered design of this case (hereinafter “the design of this case”) / Date of application 1) / Date of registration / Number of design: product: D/ E/F2: an outlined substance of design: 3) Description of synthetic resin and metal materials are used mixed with synthetic resin and metal materials. (B) The design of this case may be adjusted and used by combining it with referring 1 and reference 3 in small diskettes equipped with the inside as urban area and by combining it with a tent, etc., and using it with a tent, etc. with a tent attached to a tent, etc.) as urbanized in 2. The combination of the shape and shape of “blut, etc.” with the essential content of the design creation of 4 design is the essential point of the design content.

B. 5) Drawings: The Defendant’s primary product import and sale and the Plaintiff’s warning 1) are as shown in Appendix 1. B. The Defendant runs the business of importing and selling lighting fixtures in the name of “G”, and around June 2016, the lighting fixtures in the shape and shape indicated in Annex 2(1) from China (hereinafter “Defendant 1”).

(B) On September 7, 2016, the Plaintiff’s side sent a warning to the effect that the sale of the Defendant’s first product infringing the instant design right, i.e., the suspension of the sale of the Defendant’s product, to the Defendant. On the 30th of the same month, the Defendant responded to the purport that “the Defendant imported and sold a small quantity without knowing the instant registered design, and was not intentionally executed,” and that it promised not to sell the corresponding product.

C. On October 25, 2016, the Plaintiff still distributes infringing products to the Defendant.

arrow