1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on October 1, 2014 regarding the case shall be revoked.

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

1. Basic facts

A. 1) Date of application/registration date/registration number of the instant registered trademark: The composition of October 7, 201 / June 20, 2013 (No. 976345) : The designated goods (attached Form 1 / 4): the Defendant

(b) 1) The registration date / the renewal date/registration number: The composition of April 29, 2005 / April 29, 2005 : the designated goods (attached Form 2) : The obligee entitled to registration (attached Form 4): the Plaintiff;

(c) Composition of pre-use trademark 1: 2) Goods used: The plaintiff

D. On July 26, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a petition for a trial for invalidation on the grounds that the registered trademark of this case falls under Article 7(1)7, 10, 11, and 12 of the Trademark Act and the registration should be invalidated. (2) The Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board dismissed the Plaintiff’s petition for a trial on October 1, 2014 on the ground that “the registered trademark of this case is not similar to the registered trademark of this case, and the trademark of this case is not identical or similar to the registered trademark of this case, even if it is difficult to deem that the composition’s appearance is identical or similar, or that there is a possibility to mislead or confuse the source of goods, or that it does not constitute an application for an unlawful purpose, and thus, it does not fall under Article 7(1)7, 10, 11, and 12 of the Trademark Act.”

[Reasons for Recognition] A.1-3 Evidence, purport of whole pleading

2. Although the registered trademark of this case, which is the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion, should be invalidated due to the following reasons, the trial decision of this case, which has different conclusions, should be revoked as it is unlawful.

The registered trademark of this case and the registered trademark of this case are similar to each other, and the designated goods are also identical or similar to the other. Thus, Article 7(1)7 of the Trademark Act is applicable.

B. First Used Trademark is recognized as indicating the Plaintiff’s visibility at home and abroad, and consumers report the instant registered trademark.