Whether the applied trademark(1) and the applied trademark(2) are similar to the cited trademark’s “MARJA.KURI” (affirmative)

The case holding that the trademark applied for registration is highly likely to be recognized as a trademark in English as the trademark in the cited trademark "MAJA.KUKI" rather than the trademark "three months" in Spanish, which is a combination trademark indicated in figures and Romans, rather than the trademark "three months" in the word "application trademark (1)" and the trademark "application trademark (2)" in the word "application trademark" and "MAJA.KUKI", and if so, the trademark applied for registration is extremely similar to the word "mamar" of the cited trademark and its name for the same designated goods.

Articles 2 and 9(1)7 of the former Trademark Act (amended by Act No. 4210 of Jan. 13, 1990)

Attorney Jeon-tae et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

The Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office

Korean Intellectual Property Office Decision 90Na841,842 dated August 31, 1991

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the applicant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

원심결 이유에 의하면, 원심은 본원상표(1)([출원상표1]) 본원상표(2)([출원상표2])는 모두 로마자와 한글로 표기한 문자상표이고 인용상표 “MARJA.KURKI”는 도형과 로마자로 표기한 결합상표인데, 그 칭호에 있어 본원상표들은 “마르조”로 인용상표는 “마르자 쿠르키”로 호칭될 것이나 간이신속을 요하는 거래 사회에서는 인용상표가 “마르자” 또는 “쿠르키”만으로 호칭될 수도 있어 이렇게 인용상표가 “마르자”만으로 호칭되는 경우 본원상표들과 비교하여 볼 때 그 제3음절중 모음만이 “ㅗ”와 “ㅏ”로 구별되는 외에는 전체적으로 양 상표는 그 칭호가 극히 유사하여 양 상표를 동일한 지정상품에 사용하면 일반 소비자나 거래자에게 출처의 오인, 혼동의 염려가 있다고 판단하고 이와 같은 취지에서 본원상표들의 등록출원을 거절한 원사정을 정당하다 하여 유지하였다.

The novel refers to the term "MAZO" of the original trademark as a Spanish language, and since the cited trademark is a simple structure without any meaning, even if the original trademark is similar to the cited trademark in its partial name, it is not similar to the cited trademark because there is no concern for ordinary consumers or traders to mislead or confuse with the cited trademark when the overall observation is made. However, the original trademark is not similar to the cited trademark. However, when the original trademark is viewed as a "MAZO" of the original trademark based on the general traders or consumers of the Republic of Korea as a "three months" in Spanish language, it seems that the original trademark is more likely to be recognized as a trademark in the English language, such as the cited trademark, and if so, it is extremely similar to the original trademark "maar" of the cited trademark and its name, and it is unlikely to mislead or confuse the source of goods when it is used for the same designated goods. Therefore, there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as otherwise alleged in the misapprehension of legal principles.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and all costs of appeal shall be assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)