1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

(a) Date of application 1)/ date of registration/registration number: C/D/E 2 (iii): Designated service business: meat brokerage business, meat sales agency business, meat retail business, meat sales brokerage business, meat export and import brokerage business, processed meat export and import agency business, processed meat wholesale business, processed meat retail business, meat processed food retail business, meat processed retail business, meat processed retail business, meat processed retail business, meat processed retail business, meat processed food retail business, meat products retail business, meat products retail business, meat products retail business, meat products retail business, meat meat products retail business, meat meat meat retail business, small meat retail business, swine and pigs retail business, scambling and scam retail business, scam retail business, scam retail business, scam retail business, sab wholesale business, 4) classified by service business category: Defendant;

(b) Composition of a trademark subject to verification 1: 2) Use service: Online meat brokerage business, meat sales brokerage business, meat processed food brokerage business, and 3 users of inland meat brokerage business: Plaintiff;

C. (1) On March 13, 2018, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion that the trademark subject to confirmation falls under Article 90(1)2 of the Trademark Act and the Defendant’s registered service mark is similar to the Plaintiff’s mark, and thus, the Plaintiff’s trademark subject to confirmation and the Defendant’s registered service mark are similar to the use service business and the designated service business are similar. Therefore, the Patent Tribunal requested confirmation of the scope of the right of the registered service mark (No. 2018Da726, Aug. 27, 2018) and filed a request for affirmative confirmation of the scope of the right of the registered service mark.

(hereinafter “instant adjudication decision”). 【No ground for recognition”, “A, No. 1, 2, and 11”, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Determination as to the propriety of the instant trial decision

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The trademark “” subject to confirmation is to indicate the method of providing a service identical or similar to the designated service business of the registered service mark in a common way, and falls under Article 90(1)2 of the Trademark Act, and thus, the effect of the registered service mark does not extend to the trademark subject to confirmation. 2) Of the registered service mark, “” is on the upper part of the registered