Supreme Court: Trademark Rights Must Be Recognized Even If Known Only Locally

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] The Supreme Court has ruled that even if a company is not nationally recognized, if it is known among consumers within a region, a similar trademark cannot be registered.

On the 30th, the Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Kwon Soon-il) announced that it overturned the lower court's ruling, which had favored the plaintiff, in the appeal case filed by wedding service company CEO Mr. A against a similar company, Wedding Cool, regarding the invalidation of a trademark registration, and remanded the case to the Patent Court.

Wedding Cool registered its trade name in July 2005 and was operating when, in January 2012, Mr. A registered a similar trademark with the same name. Wedding Cool filed a trial request with the Patent Tribunal, which resulted in a decision to invalidate the registration.

Mr. A appealed to the Patent Court, arguing that although the trademark designation was similar to Wedding Cool's, Wedding Cool's trademark was not sufficiently known among domestic consumers at the time to be recognized as a specific trademark. The Patent Court canceled the Patent Tribunal's decision to invalidate the registration, stating that it was difficult to consider Wedding Cool's trademark as known to consumers.

The court cited that Wedding Cool's TV advertisements in the Daegu region lasted only 121 days in 2010 and 51 days in 2011, with short broadcast times.

However, the Supreme Court reversed the decision, stating that the Wedding Cool trademark was recognized by consumers as a specific trademark. The court focused on the fact that Wedding Cool's sales increased from 170 million KRW in 2006 to 590 million KRW in 2011. It also cited thousands of posts including advertisements and service reviews on online cafes and blogs as evidence.

The court stated, "Considering the duration of use of the Wedding Cool mark, the extent of advertising and promotion, and the trend of sales increase, it should be regarded that the Wedding Cool trademark was sufficiently known to consumers as a specific person's trademark at the time of Mr. A's trademark registration."