1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on September 26, 2017 by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on the case shall be revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s registered design (Evidence 2 and 3) 1/ Date of application / Date of registration: The name of the article B/C/D2 for design registration: E3: B: as shown in attached Form 1. (b) The design for “E” being carried out by the Defendant for a design subject to confirmation (Evidence 4) by the Defendant is as listed in attached Table 2. (c) Prior design (Evidence 5) 1: The name of the article is to be published in the Design Gazette (Registration No. 30-48388) on March 17, 2008: The name of the article for a registered design on March 17, 2008 (Registration No. 30-48388): Map 3: D. 3.

On July 12, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a petition with the Intellectual Property Tribunal for an affirmative trial to confirm the scope of right (2016Da12033) by asserting that “the design subject to confirmation is similar to the registered design of this case, and falls under the scope of the registered design of this case.” 2) On September 26, 2017, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal dismissed the said petition on the ground that “the design subject to confirmation causes a scarcity different from the registered design of this case, and does not fall under the scope of the registered design of this case.”

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there has been no dispute, each entry and video of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport of whole pleading

2. Whether the trial decision of this case is unlawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (the ground for revocation of a trial decision) is similar to the registered design of this case and falls under the scope of the registered design of this case.

The trial decision of this case, which has different conclusions, should be revoked as it is unlawful.

B. In determining the same or similar design of the relevant legal doctrine, each element constituting a design should not be prepared separately, but should be determined by either aesthetic sense, which is the person being able to make a comparison and observation as a whole. In this case, the part which is the most easy to attract the attention of the person see the design, is identified as a essential part, and that there is a difference in the aesthetic sense of ordinary consumers.