logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2012.09.20 2011고정2909
상표법위반
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On June 29, 2007, the injured party C applied to the Korean Intellectual Property Office for the registration of the service mark in the name of "D" (hereinafter "the registered service mark of this case") such as attached Form No. 1, and completed the registration on May 7, 2008, E, designated service business No. 41, art guidance business, art private teaching institute management business, etc.

The Defendant, while operating a private teaching institute for the purpose of art psychological treatment and education of “D” on the Seo-gu F and 8 Seo-gu, Daejeon, and around June 201, notified the victim of the existence of the registered service mark of this case and its infringement. However, the Defendant infringed the victim’s registered service mark by using the trade name or service mark of “D” similar to the registered service mark of this case for the same or similar service business as the designated service mark of this case as follows.

From July 5, 2011 to October 8, 2011, the Defendant displayed the trade name or service mark of “D” as shown in attached Table (2) on the retwit site signboard attached to the outside glass wall of the pertinent private teaching institute building operated by the Defendant from July 5, 201 to October 8, 201.

On July 1, 2011, the Defendant neglected to peruse the Defendant’s photograph of Defendant’s private teaching institute’s art therapy posted on the Internet, with the trade name or service mark indicated in attached Table 3, on the part of Defendant’s private teaching institute’s art therapy, and on July 1, 201, around July 1, 201 and around February 2, 201, the Defendant left the Defendant’s private teaching institute’s private teaching institute’s art therapy as shown in attached Table 930, respectively, with the trade name or service mark indicated in attached Table 930.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Each police statement of C;

1. Service mark registration certificate;

1. Each content certification;

1. A report on the delay in removing the trade name, and a fact-finding statement on the removal of the signboard;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning D art therapy classes and photographs;

1. The relevant Article of criminal facts and Articles 93 and 2(3) of the Trademark Act, all of which include the choice of punishment.

arrow