1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff registered the trademark of the trademark “D” with the Korean Intellectual Property Office as a trademark concerning Cdams, and exported goods, such as the fences attached with the said trademark, to the U.S. E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) around November 2005, upon entering into a continuous goods supply contract with the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) and requesting the Plaintiff to produce E upon receiving a summary order from a foreign customer, the Plaintiff purchased the raw materials and produced them, and then sent them to a foreign customer through the shipping company designated by the Plaintiff after undergoing the quality inspection, and then received the payment from the Plaintiff. The Defendant is a director of E and took overall charge of overseas business affairs.

B. At around January 2, 2007, E, upon receiving a request from EF trading companies (hereinafter “EF”) to supply 1,910 pages attached with the trademark “F” from EF trading companies (hereinafter “EF companies”) (hereinafter “EF companies”) and around February 2, 2007, E manufactured and exported fences attached with the said FF trademarks as the order.

C. On April 9, 2007, the Plaintiff received information from G (G, hereinafter “G”) that the fence of “F”, similar to D, is distributed to the UAE market, and resisted to E on April 9, 2007.

Accordingly, on April 12, 2007, E sent a reply to the Plaintiff that “E has requested the supply of a fence attached with the F trademark from the customer, and accordingly exported 2,000 heads at the request of the customer with knowledge that it would be unrelated to the D trademark, but as such, E promised not to export the F trademark with the above trademark since it became known that the export of the F trademark attachment cover would cause damage to the Plaintiff,” the Plaintiff would not export it with the above trademark.

E. After that, E received an additional order of 2,020 pages 2,020 on which the trademark “F” was attached from the E-ray on May 24, 2007 (Evidence 5-1) from the E-ray, but the said agreement is reached with the Plaintiff.