beta
Text
1. The defendant (Counterclaim) indicates the mark listed in the attached Table 1 as an advertising agency or an electronic commerce transaction business, and is above.
Reasons
The main lawsuit and counterclaim are also examined.
1. Basic facts
A. The service mark 1 registered by Nonparty C (hereinafter “former D”) around June 1997, Nonparty C registered its business as “D” (registration number E) and operated an advertisement publishing business. Nonparty C applied for and registered the following service marks, and on June 28, 2001, established Non-Party D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “former D”) for the purpose of manufacturing advertising materials related to the food service business, and took office as its representative director.
However, the service mark was extinguished on June 8, 2010 on the expiration of the term of existence, and its fact was registered in the service mark register on January 7, 2011.
(2) On May 22, 200, the term “D” described in Chapter 35 was cancelled as of October 31, 201, and the term “D” was cancelled as of October 31, 201, and the term “former service mark was cancelled as of September 22, 2011.” The term “D” was a leading company for which five years have elapsed since September 22, 2011, and the term “F/G/H” was published as the National Court Administration Office first on May 25, 200: “Although it was not yet dissolved to the court having jurisdiction over the location of its head office as of October 22, 201, the term “D” described in subparagraph 1 of the former Commercial Act was cancelled as of October 31, 2012, the term “the term was cancelled as of October 22, 2011,” and the term “the National Court Administration Administration Office did not make a public announcement under Article 25(1) of the former Commercial Act.”
B. Service mark 1 filed by the Plaintiff is registered as a business name from January 23, 2006 to J (registration number: K, category: advertising agency, printing, interior, food materials, electronic commerce, franchise, and logistics) and engaged in related business in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City L. (2) The Plaintiff is the right holder of the service mark (hereinafter “instant trademark”) as follows.