# Trademark Similarity Case: Ganji

The similarity assessment considers appearance, sound and meaning against the overall impression the marks make on ordinary consumers and traders.

Source: https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/778787

HOME / NEWS & INSIGHTS NEWS & INSIGHTS Trademark Similarity Case: Ganji The similarity assessment considers appearance, sound and meaning against the overall impression the marks make on ordinary consumers and traders. Trademarks 2023.01.13 published IPLEX 2 min read 2007 Heo 159 Trademark refusal [Principles of assessment] Service-mark similarity is assessed through overall appearance, pronunciation and concept, considering how ordinary consumers perceive the marks and whether their sources may be confused. Earlier registered mark Applied for trademark Mark GANZI Ganzinala Designated Goods Hats, socks, jumpers, gymnastics outfits, two-piece outfits and parkas, among other goods. Hats, socks, jumpers, gymnastics outfits, two-piece outfits and parkas, among other goods. [Comparison] 1. Appearance Both are word marks, but their letters and capitalization differ, giving them different appearances. 2. Pronunciation and concept. “GANZI” may be pronounced “ganji” or “ganzi”. In “Ganzinala”, the Korean word “nara” means a country or a figurative place associated with the preceding word and may have weak distinctiveness. If the earlier mark is shortened to “Ganji”, the pronunciation and concept coincide or are similar, creating a likelihood of confusion on the designated clothing goods. [Decisions] Despite their different appearances, the marks have similar pronunciations and concepts that could cause confusion as to source. The court found them similar. 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 Related service: Designs & trade marks ↗ Related service: IP disputes & appeals ↗ TALK TO IPLEX Discuss your IP questions We consider your technology and business needs together. ↗ Contact us Newer Trademark Similarity Case: Lee Woo-il’s Cartoon ↗ Older Trademark Similarity Case: Indeli ↗ Related insights Trademarks 2026.10.01 TikTok for confectionery: dilution can prevent registration in Korea Korean Patent Court case 2025Heo10379 explains why different goods and later commercial success did not overcome the reputation and distinctiveness of TikTok. ↗ Read article Trademarks 2026.09.30 Can Fear of a Trade Mark Dispute Justify Non-Use? Korean Supreme Court decision 2024후10504 separates an intention to launch from actual use and objective obstacles beyond the owner’s control. ↗ Read article Trademarks 2026.09.29 An App Name: A Mark for Software or for the Service It Delivers? The 010PAY decision, 2025허10405, considers actual transactions, revenue and the proper subject of Korean trade mark scope proceedings. ↗ Read article

- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/category/trademark
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/forum/view/778787
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/contact
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/ip-solutions/trademark#related-insights
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/ip-solutions/disputes#related-insights
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/contact
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/780316
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/778164
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1782
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1782
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1776
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1776
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1771
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1771