# Trademark Similarity: AUTOMAGICALLY versus MAGIC AUTO

The applied-for mark consists of “AUTOMAGICALLY,” describing something that happens automatically with an apparently magical element and a better-than-expected result. The word combines the ideas expressed by “automatic” and “magical.”

Source: https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/800214

HOME / NEWS & INSIGHTS NEWS & INSIGHTS Trademark Similarity: AUTOMAGICALLY versus MAGIC AUTO The applied-for mark consists of “AUTOMAGICALLY,” describing something that happens automatically with an apparently magical element and a better-than-expected result. The word combines the ideas expressed by “automatic” and “magical.” Trademarks 2023.02.21 published IPLEX 2 min read 2008 Heo 11088 Trademark refusal Earlier registered mark Applied for trademark Mark Designated Goods Perfume, manicure, etc. Cosmetics [Comparison of appearance, pronunciation and concept] “AUTOMAGICALLY” blends “automatic” and “magical”, suggesting that something happens automatically with a seemingly magical effect. Korean consumers may be unfamiliar with the entire word but recognize “AUTO” and “MAGIC”. For cosmetics, the court considered that the mark suggests an effect occurring automatically, as if by magic. “MAGIC AUTO” similarly suggests an automatic, magical effect for perfume and related goods. The marks have very similar concepts. Despite their different appearances and pronunciations, use on identical or similar cosmetics could cause confusion as to source. The court found the marks similar. [Designated goods] The applied-for mark's cosmetics encompass the earlier mark's perfume and related goods, so the designated goods are identical. [Decisions] The marks are similar and their designated goods are identical. 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: F1X versus F1 and Other Marks ↗ Older Trademark Similarity: UNSTRESS versus STRESS-OUT and Another Mark ↗ 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/800214
- 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/800780
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/799578
- 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