A. Whether the trademark is similar to that of the U.S. Constitution (negative)

B. Criteria for determining similarity of trademarks

A. Although the appearance of the designated goods are completely different from the appearance of the designated goods, the appearance of the designated goods are similar in their names, the two trademarks cannot be deemed to be likely to cause confusions with released goods, etc.

B. Whether a trademark is similar or not is determined by the determination of whether there is a possibility of misunderstanding or confusion as to the release of a product if the two trademarks used in the same or similar product. Thus, even if one of the appearance, name, and concept is similar, it cannot be deemed a similar trademark if it would be clearly confused with the release of a product.

Article 9(1)7, Article 9(1)9, and Article 9(1)10 of the Trademark Act

B. Supreme Court Decision 81Hu29 delivered on June 8, 1982, Supreme Court Decision 81Hu39 delivered on July 27, 1982

Seoul U.S.C. and one other

Appellants

Korean Intellectual Property Trial Office No. 73 dated March 26, 1980

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by a claimant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the original trial decision, the original trial decision is to indicate the designated goods as Class 1 fertilizer, etc. on Jan. 14, 1977 when the respondent filed an application on Apr. 11, 1975, and registered with the registration number (trademark No. 1 omitted) on Jan. 14, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as this case trademark) together with the Korean language "non-won" under the Chinese letter "non-won". The trademark registered with the registration number (trademark No. 2 omitted) on Sep. 10, 1973 by the claimant (hereinafter referred to as the "a cited trademark") is to be the category 1 (fer) in the classification of the designated goods as in this case, and its composition is to be different from the concept of the trademark "non-won" on the basis of a different form, and only there is a little similarity between the two trademarks in its name, and it is not likely to cause confusion between the trademark as a whole and the trademark under Article 97 (1) of the Trademark Act.

On the other hand, if the two trademarks are used in the same or similar goods, the similarity of trademarks is determined by the determination of whether there is a possibility of misconception or confusion as to the release, etc. of the goods. Thus, in consideration of the appearance, name, and concept of one of the similar trademarks, if it can avoid confusion as to the release of the goods (see Supreme Court Decision 81Hu29 delivered on June 8, 1982) as a whole, it cannot be deemed a similar trademark (see Supreme Court Decision 81Hu29 delivered on June 8, 1982). In light of the records, it appears that the original decision was made in the above purport, and therefore, it is acceptable to the above measures of the court below's decision, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Shin Jong-young (Presiding Justice)