Hello. I am Attorney Lee Young-kyung of Cheongchul Law Firm.
Today, I would like to introduce an important Supreme Court ruling regarding the right to use well-known marks and the right to claim prohibitions against unfair competition. The ruling 2023da216302, which was announced on July 11, 2024, addressed whether the law applicable to the permission of use by those who jointly own a well-known mark that is not registered is the Civil Act or the Trademark Act.
[Question]
According to Article 4, Paragraph 1 of the Act on the Prevention of Unfair Competition, does the person who can claim the prohibition or prevention of such acts include not only the holders of such marks but also licensees, etc., who have unique and legitimate interests regarding the use of those marks?
[Answer]
[1. Summary of the Case]
This case is known in the media as the Dongseo Furniture case, which concerns who the legitimate user of the 'Dongseo Furniture Trademark (Mark)' is, and who can file a prohibition claim under the Act on the Prevention of Unfair Competition. The development of the case can be summarized in the following table:
Time | Content |
Around 1973 | The establishment of the former Dongseo Furniture Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'Former Dongseo Furniture') and the beginning of the use of the mark in question as a product label |
Around 1978 | The mark in question became widely recognized among domestic traders and customers |
1986 | The former Dongseo Furniture registered the trademark for the mark in question (hereinafter referred to as 'the registered trademark in question') |
2002 | The former Dongseo Furniture faced bankruptcy, transferred the registered trademark in question to four individuals, and established plaintiff Company A with exclusive usage rights |
2011-2012 | Various disputes related to the use of the mark in question emerged, leading to agreements and adjustments in operational rights |
August 13, 2016 | The registered trademark in question is shared by eight individuals |
August 14, 2016 | The registered trademark in question expired due to the lapse of the validity period |
September 3, 2013 | Establishment of the defendant company, using the mark in question in an online shopping mall |
The Act on the Prevention of Unfair Competition and Protection of Trade Secrets (hereinafter 'Unfair Competition Prevention Act') Article 2, Item 1, Sub-item (a) defines
Related work cases that are good to see together
