1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on July 25, 2016 (No. 2015 Won2727) is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Basic facts

(a) Application number 1)/ Application number of the trademark in this case: 40-2014-61185/2 September 12, 2014: 3 designated goods classified as category 12: A passenger car of category 12;

(b) 1) The registration number / the filing date / the renewal registration date of the prior registered trademark: 1) the registration number / the filing date of the first registered trademark: The registration number / the filing date of the first registered trademark / the filing date: 12) the registration number / the filing date of the first registered trademark / the registration date of the first registered trademark : 2) the registration number / the registration number of the second registered trademark / the filing date of the second registered trademark / the first registered trademark / the registration date of the first registered trademark / the first registered trademark / the registration date of the first registered trademark : 12 tubes of the classification of the designated goods : cars and tubes, motor vehicles, motor vehicles for booby 12, motor vehicles, motor vehicles for transport wheel, motor vehicles, tubes, motor vehicles for transport wheel wheel, machinery, tools for transport wheel, machinery, equipment knives and equipment of Korea : c) the first registered trademark / the first registered trademark : 12th of the designated goods;

C. On April 17, 2015, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office rendered a decision to refuse the registration of the applied trademark of this case on the ground that “The trademark of this case is similar to the pre-registered trademark, and its designated goods are similar, so it constitutes Article 7(1)7 of the former Trademark Act (wholly amended by Act No. 1403, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply).” (2) The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the above decision of refusal and filed a petition for a trial on rejection as the Intellectual Property Tribunal’s 2015 Won2727. On July 25, 2016, the Intellectual Property Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on the same ground as the above decision of refusal.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions and images of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 is the composition that combines “SM5” and “NOVA” with “SM5” and “SM5”.