1. The Defendants shall:

(a) The business and advertisement of the marks listed in the attached list 1 in the attached list 2;

1. Basic facts

(a) Plaintiff’s registered service mark (hereinafter “instant service mark”): Filing date/registration number: E/F/G-designated service business: (Class 43); simple restaurant business; theater-type restaurant business; theater-type restaurant business; Lestop business; LAR service business; Over human race service business; general entertainment tavern business; general restaurant business; general restaurant business; general restaurant business; theater-type restaurant business; Kapeta business; beer shareholder management business; beer shareholder accommodation business; beer accommodation business; cooking lodging business; terminal hotel business; youth hostel business; hotel accommodation business; hotel business; accommodation business; tourist accommodation business; tourist accommodation business; accommodations business; mobile house rental business; camping accommodation business; condominium business; entertainment business; and accommodation business; and (b) accommodation business;

On August 26, 2014, Defendant B registered the domain name “D” (hereinafter “the domain name of this case”) with Avia Co., Ltd. on the use of marks such as the Defendants’ “H” and the domain name.

According to the defendants' service business registration (business registration certificate) No. 1, including accommodation and general restaurant business, etc., the defendants use the marks listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter "the defendant's marks") as marks on the web site and advertisement connected with the domain name of this case as the mark of the defendants' service business. However, according to the defendants' web site operated by the defendants, the defendants are viewed to conduct accommodation and general restaurant business, etc., and there is no dispute between the parties regarding the defendants' joint operation of the above business).

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the service mark right of this case was infringed

A. The similarity of a trademark (service mark) as to the same similarity of the mark shall be determined on the basis of the direct perception that ordinary consumers or traders feel the trademark in the transaction of the designated goods by observing the appearance, name, and concept objectively and objectively.