<Anchor> There
was a case where a franchise company, which had a food called bokjuk, which was widely known through the broadcast last year, plagiarized and tried to join the franchise business, but gave up after massive criticism poured out.
This is because many people watched the process of the store owner's efforts and efforts to develop a new menu.
However, even today, Mr. Majuk doesn't have a trademark right.
This is because someone else applied for the trademark first, and we have covered the reasons and countermeasures for this recurring.
Reporter Park Chan-geun and reporter No.
<Reporter Park Chan-geun>
[SBS 8 News on October 12th of last year: As the plagiarism controversy erupted and the boycott continued, the company's representative officially apologized on the website.]
In October of last year, the deodorization disturbance that made the world bustle.
A franchise company that tried to carry out a franchise business by copying the restaurant menu that appeared on the broadcast was hit by public opinion and closed its plans.
However, the representative of this restaurant has not yet been recognized by law for its trademark right.
This is because last year, another business operator other than the franchise company applied for a trademark to the Korean Intellectual Property Office.
[Minah Choi/Restaurant Representative: One person said his name and said,'Is he your family?'
So, when he said no, he said he didn't know, he said,'Is there a trademark application under his name?'] The
person who applied for the bokjuk trademark asked the SBS reporter, "I haven't seen an alley restaurant for a long time. I sent a reply saying, "It's just the name of the porridge I've been thinking of."
Currently, the representative of the restaurant is waiting for the Patent Office to apply for a trademark application for the restaurant name and menu name instead of the restaurant.
The current trademark law adopts the so-called'first application principle', which gives rights to the person who first applied for it.
From the standpoint of self-employed people, the solution is to apply for a menu or a store trademark when opening a business, but there are many cases where they don't know how to do it or because the cost of over 200,000 won is burdensome.
In addition, the idea of'who will take my store's name' also provides a hint of plagiarism.
---
<Reporter Noh Dong-gyu>
That's not all.
Trade names made up of widely known geographical names or common nouns are also not protected by trademark rights.
In the case of Jongno Bindaeteok, Namsan pork cutlet, and Uijeongbu Budaejigae
As a result of this, there are even cases where people use the name of someone else's store outright.
It is a galbit restaurant in Busan that has been running for nearly 60 years.
Many tourists visit this place, but last March, a restaurant of the same name opened in Yongsan-gu, Seoul.
[Sungwon Yoon/Restaurant CEO: There are quite a few regulars coming from Seoul.
One day came down and asked,'Did you have a branch in Seoul?'
I don't know we've ever made a branch...
.] The
Seoul restaurant was similar to the Haeundae restaurant, as well as the font and appearance of the signboard.
Haeundae restaurant representative sued for the idea that even the menu and outfit had been stolen.
However, at the first trial, the lawsuit was dismissed, saying that the nomination of Haeundae was not discernible and was not widely known.
[Sungwon Yoon/Restaurant CEO: I thought it wasn't.
In common sense, the name, font, and other menus are the same no matter who sees it…
I felt like I was denied everything.]
However, the Supreme Court raised the hand of the Haeundae Restaurant, seeing it as a fraudulent competition that steals the performance of others, which is widely known recently.
[Kim Woon-ho/Attorney: For a long period of time, if one person has taken care of it, and when (consumer) sees its name, he knows who he is and wants to go to that house, and if he wants to eat at that house, the law will protect it...
.]
But filing a lawsuit like this restaurant is not an easy task for self-employed people.
At the government level, it is necessary to hurry to understand the status of self-employed people's trademark and mutual theft damage, and to come up with policy and financial support measures for this.
(Video coverage: Kim Tae-hoon, Video editor: So Ji-hye, VJ: Jung Young-sam·Kim Cho-ah, Writer: Kim Chae-hyun, CG: Hong Seong-yong, Choi Jae-young, Lee Ye-jeong, Seong Jae-eun, Jeong Si-won)