logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.11.19 2015나2026069
위약벌 등
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court's explanation as to this part of the basic facts is as follows: "After filing an application for a service mark with respect to the marks of attached Form 1 "J" of 3 pages 1, "after filing an application for a service mark with the designated service business as nursing service business, health management business, etc.; and "A, 4 pages and 9 below "B," and "A, 5, and 6 (including additional numbers)" shall not be any advertisement that is inconsistent or inconsistent with each other, and "A, 1 through 5, 29, 6, and 8 (including additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)" shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for those parts of the judgment of the first instance as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) after the conclusion of the instant contract for termination of the Dong business, the Defendant borrowed the content of the instant hospital’s website without permission to use the instant service mark on the Defendant’s website; (b) used the instant service mark without permission; (c) published the Plaintiff’s photograph on the Internet Blouse, without permission; (d) used the instant hospital’s work history without permission by means of entering the Plaintiff’s photograph on the “Nber” bulletin board and the website other than the Defendant’s website; and (v) without permission, used the term “N” in a way that the Defendant’s Internet “N” search results by setting up the “N” in the search language on the “N” page; and (vi) used the term “N” without permission by slandering the method of Nlogram without permission; and (vi) claimed for the registration of invalidation of the service mark including the instant service mark, and (viii) claimed for the registration of invalidation of the Internet portal site by the Intellectual Property Tribunal.

arrow