Whether the registered trademark “+ figure” and the cited trademark “those as referred to in items, paintings, soil, gold, gold, ＋ figure + figure + figure” are similar (affirmative) and whether the designated goods are similar (affirmative with qualification)

The registered trademark is a combination trademark of characters and diagrams written in Korean, and diagrams written in the shape below the face of the person. The cited trademark is a combination trademark of characters and diagrams written in Korean. The cited trademark is a small letter written in the center in the shape of the scam, and the scamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscams in the shape of five won at specified intervals from the above in the direction of visibility from the above, and the two parts and the cited trademark are composed of characters, signs, and diagrams written in the direction of visibility in the direction of visibility between five won and the original, but their appearance differs from each other, and if there are concerns that the remaining designated goods are similar to those of the manufacturer or the other designated goods in the form of feed.

Articles 8(1) and 71(1)1 of the Trademark Act

Obproductive Co., Ltd. (Law Firm Mabun et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Oral land Co., Ltd. (Patent Attorney Song-chul, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Patent Court Decision 200Heo2880 delivered on September 8, 2000

Of the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case, the part against the Plaintiff as to feed for breeding, chip, and chip is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the Patent Court. The remaining appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. On February 10, 1998, the court below held that, in comparison with the registered trademark of this case (No. 440954) registered on February 8, 199 and the quoted trademark applied earlier (No. 419619), the registered trademark of this case is distinguishable from its appearance, but the trademark of this case can be conceptualized as "commercialization" after separate observation of the figure and letter from ordinary consumers, and it is difficult for ordinary consumers to see that the cited trademark of this case is indivisible to the extent that it is natural in the transaction, and it is difficult for those consumers to see that the trademark of this case is identical to those of the designated goods under the provisions of the Trademark Act, since it is difficult for them to see that the trademark of this case is identical to those of the designated goods under the provisions of the Trademark Act, since it is difficult for them to see that their respective constituent elements and diagrams are identical to those of the designated goods under the provisions of the Trademark Act, and thus, it is difficult for them to see that the trademark of this case is identical to the general consumers's or figures.

2. According to the records, the trademark of this case is identical to the cited trademark, but the name and appearance are different from those of the cited trademark, and the trademark of this case is identical to those of the cited trademark as a whole. Among the designated goods of the trademark of this case, bean, chemical powder, yanium, and grain mixtures, which are the designated goods of the cited trademark, belongs to similar goods that may cause confusion as to the source when using a similar trademark under the transaction common norms. Thus, the court below is just in holding that both trademarks are similar and the designated goods of this case are similar to each other, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as argued in the judgment below within this scope.

Therefore, we cannot accept the ground of appeal on this point.

However, if the other designated goods of the trademark of this case were to be raised, sib, sib, sib (the plaintiff waived the trademark right as to yeast, yeast, walk, walk, walk, walk, walk-in, walk-in, walk-in, walk-in, walk-in, walk-in, walk-in, walk-in, walk-in (at the time of registration, health food-related as raw materials of agricultural products were included in the designated goods at the time of registration, but the decision of invalidation of registration became final and conclusive on October 4, 201, while the above grain-malkin, walk-in can not be seen as being compared to the designated goods of the trademark of this case, although the defendant renounced the trademark right on August 14, 200, the product quality of this case can not be seen as being compared to the designated goods of this case.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the determination of similarity of goods and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment, since the number of the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case is similar to the designated goods of the cited trademark, and thus the registration is null and void.

Therefore, the grounds for appeal within this scope are justified.

3. Therefore, among the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case, the part of the judgment below against the plaintiff as to the number of the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case against the plaintiff shall be reversed, and this part of the case shall be remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. The remaining appeals shall be dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating

Justices Lee Jin-hun (Presiding Justice)