# Coupang Trademark Case: MAST PRO This article explains how IPLEX represented a client in a Coupang trademark complaint and helped restore sales. Source: https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/1160755 HOME / NEWS & INSIGHTS NEWS & INSIGHTS Coupang Trademark Case: MAST PRO This article explains how IPLEX represented a client in a Coupang trademark complaint and helped restore sales. Trademarks 2025.01.17 published IPLEX 5 min read Hello, this is patent attorney Yongduck Kim of IPLEX IP Law Firm. IPLEX draws on experience with Coupang IP complaints to prepare responses suited to the platform's procedures and support reinstatement. This article explains how IPLEX represented a client in a Coupang trademark complaint and helped restore sales. Case overview and the key points The MAST PRO case involved an unrelated party's Korean registration of an overseas brand. IPLEX helped restore sales of genuine imported products by challenging the basis of the complaint. Case Content See also Case background: a trademark complaint and Coupang sales suspension A client selling genuine MAST PRO tattoo equipment on Coupang received a sales-suspension notice. An individual had registered MAST PRO in Korea and filed an infringement complaint based on that registration. The client imported genuine goods from Shijiazhuang Dragonhawk Industry Co., Ltd. (Dragonhawk), but the Korean registration was held by a third party rather than the manufacturer. This mismatch led to the suspension. The key issue: a trademark registration obtained in bad faith? The Korean MAST PRO registration was held by an individual unrelated to the brand's manufacturer. We examined the circumstances in which that individual had obtained the registration. We at IPLEX IP Law Firm have determined that there is a sufficient reason for this trademark to be invalid. IPLEX IP Law Firm Article 34 of the Trademark Act Registration may be void if a trademark of another person already known to domestic and foreign customers has been filed and registered for fraudulent purposes. In fact, “MAST PRO” has long been known to the tattoo industry in overseas countries (such as China). IPLEX IP Law Firm Article 34 of the Trademark Act The registration may be invalid even if you have applied for the same or similar trademark as you are aware that it is being used by others through a partnership, employment, or business transaction relationship. In this case, it was problematic for a third party to trade (or obtain information) with a Chinese company and then apply for a trademark on their own. IPLEX IP Law Firm has secured a trade agreement showing that the individual who applied for the trademark through the acquisition of evidence has signed a deal with a real Chinese manufacturer. IPLEX IP Law Firm Response strategy: invalidity and abuse of rights First, we have proven that the customer is importing the goods through the official distribution route, and that the Chinese manufacturer has never allowed the registration of the domestic trademark. The response relied in particular on the Supreme Court’s en banc decision 2010 Da 103000: enforcement may be disallowed as an abuse of rights where grounds for invalidating the registered trademark are clear. It emphasized that formal registration alone does not justify seeking an injunction or damages where invalidity is evident. We argued to Coupang that the complaint relied on an improperly obtained registration and that the suspension should be lifted. Sales were subsequently restored. Implications for protecting legitimate overseas brands This case shows that even though it is already a well-known brand overseas, it can cause unexpected damage to sellers who bring their products into the official distribution path by registering a trademark with a third party in Korea. The trademark registration is not in accordance with the Trademark Act, and any attempt to gain a fraudulent benefit from another’s trademark is likely to be corrected through invalidation proceedings. IPLEX IP Law Firm IPLEX IP Law Firm has extensive experience in intellectual property rights (patents, trademarks, designs, etc.) and protects the legal rights of its clients. We have the following strengths: In-depth fact-finding We collect evidence of manufacturer relationships, brand recognition and distribution history. Exact Legal Review Strategy We assess abuse-of-rights arguments under Korean trademark law and relevant Supreme Court decisions. Rapid Platform Response We use experience with major marketplaces to respond efficiently to sales suspensions. Broad network. Cooperation with domestic and overseas partners helps us communicate with foreign businesses and obtain evidence promptly. IPLEX IP Law Firm will continue to do its best to protect the rights of those who have suffered damage due to the trademark right that is clearly invalid in Korea and abroad. If you are struggling with a trademark dispute or infringement lawsuit, please contact us. If you need professional advice on intellectual property rights such as trademark infringement, patent and design disputes, or idea protection in Coupang, please feel free to contact IPLEX IP Law Firm. We will be your legal partner. Read the Korean source This article reflects the information available when it was published. Contact us to discuss your circumstances. Discuss this topic ↗ All articles TALK TO IPLEX Discuss your IP questions We consider your technology and business needs together. ↗ Contact us Newer Coupang Case: Responding to a Design Infringement Issue ↗ Related insights Trademarks 2026.05.08 Coupang Trademark Suspension Case: Polaroid An online IP complaint can require a response within a short deadline. A Coupang sales suspension may affect visibility, advertising, revenue, inventory, and account standing. This case required legal analysis and a structured response, beyond simply changing the product title. ↗ Read article Trademarks 2026.04.20 Coupang Trademark Case: Responding to a Suspension Involving “Jibbitz” Online sellers may face an unexpected sales suspension after an IP complaint. This article examines why responses to Coupang trademark complaints can fail and how a more structured response may help. ↗ Read article Trademarks 2026.03.26 Coupang Trademark Enforcement: Seller Response Rejected and Suspension Maintained IPLEX case study: goods similarity, market evidence and unfair competition arguments supporting rejection of a seller’s response and continued suspension on Coupang. ↗ Read article - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/category/trademark - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/forum/view/1160755 - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/contact - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/contact - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/1170359 - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/1468031 - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/1468031 - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/1457253 - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/1457253 - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/1432904 - https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/1432904