Whether an application trademark "LITTRE FOLK" is a technical trademark indicating the use of children's uniforms as designated goods in a common way (negative)

The original meaning of the "LITTRE FOLK" in the applied trademark for children's uniforms means multiple kinds of goods and needs to be fair. Even if ordinary consumers recognize it as a small person or child, it is indicated in a common way in the use of children's clothes, or it cannot be said that ordinary traders or consumers in Korea recognize it as indicating the use of designated goods. Thus, it cannot be said that the applied trademark cannot be registered as a so-called technical trademark.

Article 8 (1) 3 of the former Trademark Act (amended by Act No. 4210 of Jan. 13, 1990)

Rozmanman Rocoporads

The Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office

Korean Intellectual Property Office Decision 194 April 30, 1991

The original adjudication shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the Korean Intellectual Property Office Appeal Trial Office.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. According to the reasoning of the original decision, the court below determined that the composition of the original trademark is "LITLE FOLK" and the designated goods are "LITLE" of the category of goods, and the overall part of the original trademark is "LITLE" of the original trademark is "small, native," and since the latter part is "FOLK" of the people, it is recognized as "small," or "children" of the latter part as "children", and it is related to "child uniforms" of the designated goods," and determined that the original trademark is the direct use of the designated goods, and that the trademark is "child uniforms of the small, small, (human, human, etc.), and it cannot be rejected by the amendment of the Trademark Act (amended by Act No. 1019, Oct. 19, 198).

2. However, “LITTRE FOLK” means a word which is not well used, and its original meaning refers to the case where multiple applicants use it in good ways and, as alleged by the applicant, there is a possibility for ordinary consumers to recognize it as a small person or child, it cannot be said that it is indicated in a common way the use of children’s uniforms, which are the designated goods as provided by Article 8(1)3 of the Trademark Act.

Article 8 (1) 3 of the former Trademark Act provides that so-called technical trademark (technical trademark) cannot be registered. It is against the public interest to allow a specific person to exclusively use such trademark that anyone wishes to use, and there is reason to avoid performing his/her functions as a trademark because there is no special distinction between the goods of another person and the goods of another person. The phrase "LITTREFK" cannot be deemed as indicating the above trademark in a common way as children's clothes, or it cannot be said that ordinary traders or consumers in Korea recognize it as indicating the use of designated goods by reporting the above trademark. Therefore, it cannot be said that the above trademark falls under this.

3. The original adjudication contains an error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles under Article 8 (1) 3 of the Trademark Act before the amendment, and the arguments pointing this out are with merit.

Therefore, without examining the remaining parts of the grounds of appeal, the original decision is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Korean Intellectual Property Office Appeal Trial Office. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jae-chul (Presiding Justice)