1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

(a) registered trademark 1) filing date/registration date//registration number: C/D/E 2: Designated goods: 3) A right holder: Defendant;

(b) 1) Date of application/registration date//registration number: F/ G/H2: 3) Designated goods: Right holder: I: medical Onnuri factors classified by category 10, and medical coolant 4);

C. On March 16, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) against the Defendant on March 16, 2017, the registered trademark was wholly amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same applies).

(2) On October 1, 2018, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered a decision to invalidate the Plaintiff’s request for a trial on invalidation of the trademark registration, asserting that the trademark falls under Article 7(1)7 (2) of the former Trademark Act (No. 2017Da810), on the ground that the registered trademark and its mark are not similar to the registered trademark, and thus, even if not examining the similarity of the designated goods, it does not fall under Article 7(1)7 of the former Trademark Act.

(hereinafter “instant adjudication decision”). 【No ground for recognition”, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the purport of the entire pleadings

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

A. The gist of the party’s assertion is that the Plaintiff’s registered trademark 1 does not form a new concept beyond the meaning of simply combining “asure”, and it is difficult to view that separate observation of the constituent parts of the pre-registered trademark is an integral combination to the extent that it is natural not to be natural in the ordinary trade.

Moreover, the part “as the designated goods are marks that have a sense of efficacy of medical greenhouseact or air conditioners for medical use, and thus, has weak distinctiveness. Therefore, the part falls under the essential part.

Inasmuch as a registered trademark is referred and conceptually referred to as "Hau", the trademark is similar in accordance with the name and concept of "Hau", the essential part of the prior registered trademark, and its name and concept.

As such, the registered trademark is.