All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant established a company with the trade name of “C” and used the mark “C” in a common way, and there was no purpose of unfair competition. Thus, in using the above service mark, the Defendant does not have the effect of the service mark right of “C”, which is a D’s registered service mark pursuant to Article 51(1)1 of the Trademark Act. (2) There is no possibility of mistake or confusion between the Defendant’s service mark and the service mark registered with D, and thus, it is not identical or similar.

3) Since the Defendant was unaware of the fact that D had registered D as D’s service mark itself, there was no intention to use the above mark as D’s registered service mark infringement D’s registered service mark right. 4) In light of the fact that D used D’s trade name for about two years and two months before D filed a complaint, and that D was subject to prosecution’s non-prosecution disposition once and one time before D filed a complaint, the Defendant was subject to prosecution’s non-prosecution disposition, etc., even if the Defendant infringed D’s above registered service mark right, it is not illegal, because there is considerable reason to believe that D’s use of the above mark as a legitimate act, or there is no possibility of expectation for suspending the use of the above mark.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence (the fine of 500,000 won) is too minor.

2. Determination:

A. Defendant 1) The main text of Article 51(1)1 of the Trademark Act provides that “The trademark right shall not have effect on the trademark indicating one’s trade name or the well-known abbreviation of one’s trade name, in a common way, in a common way.”

Here, the term “a trade name shall be indicated in a common way” means to report the mark and to indicate it so that ordinary consumers can recognize it as a trade name.