logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.02.05 2014가합595770
상표권침해금지
Text

1. The Defendants shall use each mark listed in the separate sheet No. 1 for each product listed in the separate sheet No. 2.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s status 1) was a legal entity that completed the registration of incorporation on February 27, 1981 for the purpose of manufacturing and selling bedclothess, food and daily miscellaneous goods manufacturing and selling business, etc. The Plaintiff is a legal entity that completed the registration of incorporation on April 29, 1981 for the purpose of manufacturing and selling bedclothess (hereinafter “Plaintiffs, etc.” and “Plaintiffs, etc.” in the case of a mobile name for the Plaintiff and a stock company.

2) Defendant A used the trade name of “B” or “C” and indicated each trademark listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Defendant-Use Trademark”) on each product listed in the separate sheet No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as “each product of this case”) and sold it on the Internet site, etc.

3) Defendant 1, Inc. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”)

(B) The purpose of medical devices and household appliances wholesale and retail business is a corporation that completed the registration of incorporation on June 11, 2010. (B) The Plaintiff’s business and the Plaintiff’s subsidiary company (the Plaintiff’s subsidiary company) opened the business around 1981 and continues to operate the business until now, thereby holding approximately KRW 150 and approximately 500 agents in the Seoul metropolitan area. The total sales from around 2004 to around 2013 were approximately KRW 460.6 billion, and the total sales from around 2007 to around 2013 were approximately KRW 7.99 billion.

2) In addition, around 2007 and around 2012, Ebre Co., Ltd. achieved the market share of one market share in the domestic bedclothes market. From around 1989 to around 2014, the Plaintiff et al. has been awarded several times. Accordingly, the Plaintiff et al.’s “Brein” trademark is widely known to the general public, and the Plaintiff et al.’s “Brein” trademark is widely known to the general public; on December 2012, 2012, at a survey conducted on the number of women aged between 30 and 54 years old, residing in Seoul and 6 Metropolitan Cities, with 78.6% of the total responses, and 68.4% of the English trademarks “.”

arrow