[1] Whether registration of a trademark may be prohibited or a registered trademark may be invalidated in a case where there is no possibility for consumers to mislead or confuse the origin of a product specifically and individually in light of the transaction situation, etc. (negative)

[2] The case holding that although the registered trademark " " and the registered trademark " " themselves are similar to the mark itself, they may cause misconception and confusion as to the source of "dras, sckk, non-medical straws, ice cream, food cream, and sugar" among the designated goods, they may cause misconception and confusion as to the source, it is not likely that consumers may cause misconception and confusion as to the source in light of the general transaction circumstances, etc.

[1] Article 7 (1) 7 of the Trademark Act / [2] Article 7 (1) 7 of the Trademark Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 96Hu153, 96Hu191 delivered on September 24, 1996 (Gong1996Ha, 3201), Supreme Court Decision 97Hu594 delivered on October 10, 1997 (Gong1997Ha, 3462), Supreme Court Decision 99Hu2532 delivered on January 21, 200 (Gong200Sang, 491)

Lawing System and Co., Ltd. (Patent Attorney Choi Ho-seok et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

오리온스낵인터내셔널 주식회사 (소송대리인 법무법인 바른 담당변호사 김치중외 1인)

Patent Court Decision 2005Heo2090 Decided July 22, 2005

Of the part of the judgment below against the plaintiff, the part of the designated goods of the trademark registration number No. 49313 of the trademark registration number No. 4933 concerning "dows, non-medical straws, ice straws, ice cream, food booms, and sugar" is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the Patent Court. The remaining

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In light of the record, the designated goods are as follows: “Stop chips, stoves, stoves, stoves, non-medical bags, ice cream, ice cream, stoves, stoves, stoves, sugar, stoves, grain stoves, stoves, and stoves, and stoves, and the registered trademark of this case (registration number No. 49313) and the designated goods are as follows; and the similarity of the registered trademark of this case (registration number No. 344433) composed of “Stoves, ice ctoves, stoves, ctoves, ctoves, cooking, stoves, stoves, and stoves.”

A. As to the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case, the remainder, excluding the part of “breab, grain spabed, and spabed.”

Even if two trademarks are similar to one another in their appearance, name, and concept, and both trademarks appear to be similar in general, abstract, and periodically, in cases where there is no concern for consumers to mislead or confuse the origin of goods in a trade society specifically and individually, taking into account the general trade situation surrounding the goods in question, the degree of awareness of the trademark, and the relation with the goods in question, etc., in a case where there is no concern for consumers to mislead or confuse the origin of goods in a trade society, even if both trademarks exist, there is no obstacle to the protection of the trademark right holder, consumers, and traders, and thus the registration of such trademark shall not be prohibited or invalidated (see Supreme Court Decisions 96Hu153, 96Hu191, Sept. 24, 196; 9Hu2532, Jan. 21, 200).

(1) Of the designated goods of the instant registered trademark, the part of “drums, non-medical straws, straws, straws, food straws, and grooms”

이 사건 등록상표와 선등록상표는 그 호칭에 있어서 세 음절 중 첫 음절과 마지막 음절 및 초성과 중성으로 이루어진 가운데 음절의 중성인 모음이 같고, 가운데 음절의 초성도 ‘ㅋ’과 ‘ㅌ’의 파열음이어서 전체적으로 느껴지는 청감이 유사하므로, 양 상표는 그 표장이 전체적으로 서로 유사하고, 이 사건 등록상표의 지정상품 중 ‘드롭스, 비스킷, 비의료용 추잉검, 아이스크림, 식빵, 각설탕’ 부분은 선등록상표의 지정상품과 동일·유사하다.

Therefore, in this case where there is no record that there is no concern for consumers to mistake or confuse the source of the above designated goods in the trade society, there is a concern that if the registered trademark of this case is used together with the pre-registered trademark on the above designated goods, it may cause mistake or confusion as to its source.

On the contrary, the court below determined that the mark itself is not similar to the prior registered trademark, or even if similar, considering the specific and individual circumstances, there is no concern for consumers to mislead or confuse the source in relation to the designated goods in the transaction society. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on determining the similarity of trademarks, failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. The ground of appeal pointing this out has merit.

(2) Of the designated goods of the instant registered trademark, “techip, sp, sp,” part of the designated goods

원심이 그 채용증거에 의하여 적법하게 인정한 사실 및 기록에 의하면, 이 사건 등록상표의 상표권자인 피고는 선등록상표의 출원일인 1995. 3. 25.보다 훨씬 전인 1988. 7.경부터 감자를 썰어서 튀긴 ‘감자스낵’ 제품에 이 사건 등록상표를 부착하여 생산하기 시작한 이래 위 상품을 지속적으로 생산·판매하여 오면서, 그 총 매출액이 1998년에는 약 72억 원, 1999년에는 약 108억 원, 이 사건 등록상표의 출원일인 2000. 3. 9.이 속한 2000년에는 약 184억 원에 달하였고, 그 시장점유율이 1998년에는 12.2%로 2위, 1999년에는 14.9%로 2위, 2000년에는 13.1%로 1위를 기록하였으며, 또한 피고는 1988년부터 2000년까지 동안 위 ‘감자스낵’ 제품에 관하여 텔레비전, 라디오, 신문, 잡지, 경기장 광고물 등 다양한 광고매체를 통하여 광고를 하여 오면서, 그 광고비로 1992년부터 2000년까지 매년 적게는 약 5억 원, 많게는 약 15억 원 정도를 지출하여 온 사실을 알 수 있는바, 위와 같은 ‘감자스낵’ 제품의 생산 및 판매기간, 매출규모, 시장점유율, 광고현황 등을 종합하면, 이 사건 등록상표는 이 사건 등록상표의 출원당시 ‘감자스낵’ 제품에 대한 관계에서 일반 수요자나 거래자 사이에서 피고의 상표로 현저하게 인식되어 있는 상표라고 할 것이고, 한편 선등록상표가 ‘감자스낵’ 제품에 대한 관계에서 현실로 사용되었다고 볼 만한 자료는 기록상 보이지 아니한다.

그렇다면 이 사건 등록상표의 지정상품 중 ‘감자스낵’ 제품이 속하는 ‘포테이토칩, 건과자’ 부분이 선등록상표의 지정상품 중 ‘건과자’ 부분과 동일·유사하여 양 상표가 일반적·추상적·정형적으로는 서로 유사해 보인다 하더라도, 위 지정상품을 둘러싼 일반적인 거래실정과 양 상표의 주지 정도 및 위 지정상품과의 관계 등을 종합적·전체적으로 고려할 때, 거래사회에서 수요자들이 구체적·개별적으로 위 지정상품의 출처에 관하여 오인·혼동을 일으킬 염려가 없다.

Therefore, it is proper that the court below's conclusion that the registered trademark of this case is not likely to cause mistake or confusion as to its source even if it is used together with the registered trademark of this case on the designated goods, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles, incomplete deliberation, omission of judgment, etc.

B. Of the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case, as to “spawn, grain spawn, and spabbed” portion

Of the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case, the term “spawn, grain spawn, brub,” among the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case, comprehensively considering the actual circumstances of the transaction, such as quality, shape, use and production, sales sector, scope of consumers, etc., cannot be deemed as similar to the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case. Thus, even if the registered trademark of this case is used for the designated goods, there is no concern

Therefore, the court below's conclusion that the registered trademark of this case is not likely to cause mistake or confusion as to its source even if it is used on the designated goods is proper, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles, incomplete deliberation, omission of judgment, etc. which affected the conclusion of the

2. Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below against the plaintiff as to the designated goods of the registered trademark of this case concerning "dras, non-medical stringk, ice stringk, food boom, and sugar" shall be reversed, and this part of the case shall be remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination, and the remaining appeal shall be dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Jeon Soo-ahn (Presiding Justice)