1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

(a) The registered trademark 1) filing date/registration date//registration number: C/D/E 2: 3) Designated goods: Newly Inserted by Presidential Decree No. 25 of the category of goods: New-born Boothpers (Medical Uniforms), inner wraps (Medical Uniforms) for infants, and inner wraps (Medical Uniforms) 4): The Plaintiff;

(b) 1) Date of application/registration date//registration number: F/ G/H2: Designated goods: (iii): the defendant;

C. 1) The Defendant against the Plaintiff on September 18, 2017: (a) the registered trademark of this case was previously amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same applies) in relation to the pre-registered trademark.

(2) On January 30, 2019, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal filed a petition for a trial for invalidation of trademark registration (2017Dang2959) by asserting that the registration should be invalidated on the ground that the registered trademark falls under Article 7(1)7, and the registered trademark of this case is identical or similar to the prior registered trademark, and the designated goods of the instant registered trademark are identical or similar to those of the prior registered trademark, and thus, the instant registered trademark of this case should be invalidated on the ground that its registration falls under Article 7(1)7 of the former Trademark Act in relation to the prior registered trademark and should be invalidated.

(hereinafter “instant adjudication decision”). 【The ground for recognition” has no dispute, Gap’s written evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 11, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

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

A. 1) Grounds for revoking the decision of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s argument is that it is newly developed by converting the inner wrap, which is the designated goods of the instant registered trademark, into the form of entering the inner wrap, and the inner wraps for infants, and it is difficult to view the registered trademark as identical in terms of transaction norms in consideration of the interest, atmosphere and quality, shape, use, production and sales sector, which are the designated goods of the prior registered trademark. Accordingly, the instant registered trademark does not fall under Article 7(1)7 of the former Trademark Act in relation to the prior registered trademark, and thus, it does not fall under such provision.