1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on January 18, 2018 on the case No. 2016Da3102 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 7, 2016, the Defendant rendered the instant trial ruling with the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board No. 2016Da3102 against the Plaintiff.

A request for a trial to revoke the registration of a service mark that seeks the revocation of the registration of the service mark on the ground that the registered service mark of this case was not used.

(2) Article 73(1)3 of the former Trademark Act (wholly amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same) provides that “The registered service mark of this case is subject to the application for trademark registration filed after this Act enters into force,” and Article 73(1)3 of the former Trademark Act (wholly amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same) provides that “The registered service mark of this case is subject to the application for trademark registration filed after this Act enters into force,” and the registered trademark of this case is C before the enforcement date of the amended Trademark Act. Thus, Article 73(1)3 of the former Trademark Act (wholly amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same) shall apply to this case.

Therefore, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal’s determination by applying Article 119(1)3 of the current Trademark Act is erroneous, but since Article 73(1)3 of the former Trademark Act and Article 119(1)3 of the current Trademark Act are substantially identical, such error does not adversely affect the outcome of the trial decision.

Pursuant to the above, the decision of this case was rendered that the trademark registration should be revoked.

(b) The registration number of the instant registered service mark / the filing date/registration date: The designated service business: The designated service business is as shown in the attached Table, such as vocational education and training guidance business, classified by category 41.

[Reasons for Recognition] Confession (Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Whether the trial decision of this case is unlawful

A. The plaintiff is deemed to have been admitted as a confession, and the registered service mark of this case is from the plaintiff.