beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 7, 2011, the Plaintiff respectively registered two trademarks (hereinafter “instant trademarks 1 and 2”) with the Korean Intellectual Property Office as follows.
1) The filing date of the first trademark of this case 1)/ the registration date/registration number: The designated goods consisting of 16/10, 2012. 7/16/1009378 (b) of December 7, 2012: c) : Rawer consortium, riff (except skiing lifts and spons), riffs), riffing equipment for transporting people and products, rawlsbros (hereinafter referred to as “rawererer pipe, etc.”) filing date of the second trademark of this case 1) / the registration date of the pipe / the registration number: metal pipe 201. The designated goods of this case 1/12, 201 / 40-94171(b) : metal refining, 30/300,00,000 and 40,000,000 metal pipes connected to the structures, 40/30,000,000) metal pipe 2.
B. The Defendants filed a claim with the Intellectual Property Tribunal for the invalidation of the registration of the trademark No. 2 in the instant case under the Intellectual Property Tribunal No. 2013Da3117 and the trademark No. 1 in the instant case under the Intellectual Property Tribunal No. 2013Da3118, but the Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered a ruling dismissing all the Defendants’ claims on February 27, 2015.
C. After doing so, the Defendants filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of a trial decision on the instant case with the Patent Tribunal No. 2015No. 2204, the Patent Tribunal. On October 30, 2015, the Patent Court rendered a decision revoking a trial decision on the instant case No. 2013Da3117 by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on the ground that the registration of the instant trademark No. 2 ought to be invalidated, and the said decision became final and conclusive on November 14, 2015.
Meanwhile, on May 18, 2015, the Defendants issued a summary order on the facts constituting an infringement of the Plaintiff’s trademarks Nos. 1 and 2 from the Changwon District Court. However, in the formal trial of the above court No. 2015Da723, the part on the trademarks No. 2 of this case is above.