logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2020.11.19 2019고단1926
디자인보호법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is the representative director of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”), in the case of Pakistan, and entered into a contract for the supply of lighting fixtures to be installed in the Daegu-gun E Apartment-gun Apartment-gun apartment complex in the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. among the lighting fixtures, and the victim F would supply lighting fixtures of the design registered with registration number G similar H (hereinafter “the registered design of this case”). However, the Defendant was willing to manufacture and deliver the same design at his own discretion, when the payment period is imminent without ordering the victim to do so.

Around August 2018, the Defendant manufactured a design similar to the registered design of the above complainant at the above factory C (hereinafter “Defendant design of this case”) with a total of KRW 1,096 market prices of KRW 38,360,000,000, and supplied the design to the above apartment site, thereby infringing the victim’s design right.

2. According to the records, the following facts are recognized.

C On December 26, 2018, the Intellectual Property Tribunal filed a petition against the victim for a trial to confirm the scope of passive rights that the instant design does not fall under the scope of the registered design right.

On May 22, 2019, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered a ruling dismissing C’s request for a trial on the grounds that the Defendant’s design falls under the scope of the registered design of this case.

C filed a lawsuit with the Patent Court seeking the revocation of the above decision.

On October 23, 2020, the Patent Court rendered a judgment citing C’s claim on the ground that the overall aesthetic sense with the registered design of this case does not fall under the scope of the right, and this became final and conclusive.

According to the above facts, the defendant design of this case is not a design similar to the registered design of this case, and thus, the victim.

arrow