1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On October 29, 2015, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s registered trademark of this case as indicated in the following Paragraph (b) falls under Article 73(1)3 of the former Trademark Act (wholly amended by Act No. 1403, Feb. 29, 2016; hereinafter the same) and thus, the trademark registration of the designated goods subject to cancellation should be revoked, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s registered trademark of this case as indicated in the following Paragraph (b) was not used in the Republic of Korea for at least three consecutive years before the date of the request for a trial on the designated goods listed in attached Form 1 (hereinafter “designated goods subject to cancellation”). The Defendant filed a request against the Plaintiff for a trial on cancellation of trademark registration of the designated goods subject to cancellation (hereinafter “request for a trial of this case”).

(2) On November 23, 2016, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered a trial ruling accepting the instant registered trademark on the ground that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone does not recognize that the Plaintiff, an owner of the trademark right, or an exclusive or non-exclusive licensee has any justifiable reason to use or not use the instant registered trademark within three years before the date of the instant trial request on the designated goods subject to revocation.

B. The Defendant’s registration number/application date/registration date of the instant registered trademark: Designated goods: Children’s clothes, diskettes, sandbox, slots, etc. (attached Form 2) specified in Chapter 25 of the classification of goods.

[Judgment of the court below] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the trial decision of this case is unlawful

A. Whether the Defendant constitutes an interested party under Article 73(6) of the former Trademark Act, and the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is sought revocation of trademark registration for part of the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case. Thus, even if a trial decision revoking trademark registration for certain designated goods becomes final and conclusive due to the acceptance of the request for a trial, the remaining designated goods are included.