1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

(a) The registered trademark/service mark of the instant case (a)(2) (hereinafter “instant registered trademark”) / Date of application / Date of registration / Date of registration / Date of renewal / Registration : C/ D/O 12 March 12, 2015 / Trademark E (2): Designated goods/service : [Attachment].

(4) Final right holder: Plaintiffs

B. (1) On July 6, 2015, the Defendant filed a request for a trial to revoke trademark registration (Article 73(4) and 73(1)3 of the Trademark Act (amended by Act No. 1403, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter “former Trademark Act”) with the Intellectual Property Tribunal against the Plaintiffs, on the ground that “The registered trademark of this case shall be revoked pursuant to Article 73(4) and 73(1)3 of the Trademark Act (hereinafter “former Trademark Act”) against any of its trademark holders, exclusive or non-exclusive licensee, by asserting that “The registered trademark of this case shall be revoked pursuant to Article 73(4) and 73(1)3 of the Trademark Act (Article 2015Da38077, Jan. 3, 2015) shall not be used in the Republic of Korea for three or more consecutive years before the filing date of the trial to revoke the trademark registration without justifiable grounds.

(2) On January 10, 2017, the Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered a trial ruling accepting the instant request for a trial (hereinafter “instant trial ruling”) by the Defendant on the ground that “the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have properly used the instant registered trademark on the designated goods subject to revocation within three years before the date of the request for a revocation trial, and it cannot be deemed that there is any justifiable reason for not using the registered trademark.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the trial decision of this case is unlawful

A. The summary of the plaintiffs' assertion (the grounds for revoking the trial decision) is that the registered trademark of this case is subject to revocation by the plaintiff B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "Plaintiff 2") or the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "F"), who is the implied non-exclusive licensee.