# Trademark Similarity: Summary of Judicial Findings

A service mark distinguishes the source of services and helps prevent confusion. Because this function is ordinarily performed by the mark as a whole, the comparison considers its overall appearance, sound and meaning.

Source: https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/947815

HOME / NEWS & INSIGHTS NEWS & INSIGHTS Trademark Similarity: Summary of Judicial Findings A service mark distinguishes the source of services and helps prevent confusion. Because this function is ordinarily performed by the mark as a whole, the comparison considers its overall appearance, sound and meaning. Trademarks 2023.11.08 published IPLEX 3 min read 2008 Heo 3711 Trademark registration invalidation [Decisions] A service mark is generally assessed as a whole. Where a particular element attracts attention and supplies the mark's distinctiveness, that dominant element may be compared with the other mark. Earlier registered service mark The Registered Service Mark [Comparison] 1. Appearance The registered service mark: depicts a blue-and-white penguin wearing a yellow collar and black glasses, with yellow lettering to its right: The earlier registered service mark: depicts a male and female monkey standing arm in arm in colored clothing, with orange lettering below: The two compositions differ in appearance. 2. Pronunciation and concept The graphics and wording are separable in both marks and can be perceived independently. Both marks use wording meaning “Glasses Country.” For optical-store services, that wording describes the services and lacks distinctiveness under former Article 6(1)(3) of the Trademark Act. Consumers would therefore identify the registered mark through its penguin graphic and the earlier mark through its pair of monkeys. Those images have different pronunciations and concepts. [Decisions] The marks differ in appearance, pronunciation and concept and were not considered similar overall. 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 Column: Technology-Based Listings for AI Companies and Technology Business Plans ↗ Older Trademark Similarity: Key Points from a Court Decision ↗ 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/947815
- 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/948077
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/946550
- 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