![\"\"](\"http:\/\/clarivate.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2019\/09\/1-274x300-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\nOne of Korea’s biggest holidays, Chuseok, has ended very recently. In Chuseok, families will gather to spend their time eating delicious food. In particular, there is something that cannot be missed during this holiday-\u2018Alcohol\u2019. Korea has famous liquor brands in each region as shown below.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Soju (the most consumed local alcohol in Korea) is popular during this period, and with a brand representing each region – competition for the national holiday period market is fierce. The trademark dispute we will discuss today is related to the history of Hallasan, the representative soju of Jeju Island.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Hallasan Soju began to be produced in Hallasan Co., Ltd. in 1964, and has since developed into the representative soju of Jeju Island. Then, in 1998, Hallasan launched a mild soju with lowered degree of alcohol. The trademark is called ‘\ud55c\ub77c\uc0b0\ubb3c \uc21c\ud55c\uc18c\uc8fc (Hallasanmul Sunhan Soju)’ as you can see below.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/clarivate.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2019\/09\/2-300x273-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
On July 2, 2014, Hallasan Co., Ltd. acquired the trademark rights from Olle Co., Ltd. On September 15, Hallasan Co., Ltd. changed the name of ‘\ud55c\ub77c\uc0b0\ubb3c \uc21c\ud55c\uc18c\uc8fc (Hallasanmul Sunhan Soju)’ to \u2018\ud55c\ub77c\uc0b0 \uc62c\ub798 (Hallasan Olle)\u2019. Since then, there have been a few changes in the trademark for the same product as seen below, but after retaining the name ‘\ud55c\ub77c\uc0b0 \uc62c\ub798 (Hallasan Olle)’, the name was changed back to ‘Hallasan 17 (\ud55c\ub77c\uc0b0 17)’ this year (2019).<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/clarivate.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2019\/09\/3-371x150-1.jpg\"){kind=spacer}
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/clarivate.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2019\/09\/4-300x262-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The word \u2018\uc62c\ub798\u2019 used by the Hallasan company for soju means \u2018\uc62c\ub808(olle road)\u2019. ‘Olle’ means a path made by connecting alleys, mountain roads, and wild roads along the coastal area of \u200b\u200bJeju Island, and in the dialect of Jeju Island, it means ‘narrow alley’. There are a total of 21 Olle trails on Jeju Island, and if you connect them, you can travel around Jeju Island (source: Naver Dictionary) Therefore, many people think of Olle trail when they hear Jeju Island.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
As Olle trail is a representative symbol of Jeju Island, not only Hallasan company but also other soju company ‘Jejusoju’ (pictured below) used this name and there was a legal dispute.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/clarivate.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2019\/09\/5.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
Jejusoju launched \u2018\uc81c\uc8fc\uc62c\ub808\uc18c\uc8fc (Jeju-Olle Soju)’ on August 6, 2014. In other words, only ‘\ub798’ and ‘\ub808’ at the end are different, and two soju brands with the same pronunciation and symbol are released. Hallasan sued Jejusoju for infringing trademark rights.<\/p>\n
Hallasan alleged that Jejusoju has violated trademark rights, confuses sales subjects and product subjects and violates the Unfair Competition Prevention Law. The defendant, Jeju, argued that \u201cOlle\u201d is a geographical name and therefore cannot be regarded as an important part of the trademark.<\/p>\n
In response, the court accepted the claim of Hallasan Corporation for infringement because the \u2018\uc62c\ub808(olle)\u2019 part is a discernible key and its name is similar, which may confuse consumers and infringe on trademark rights.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/clarivate.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2019\/09\/6-271x300-1.jpg\")
\u201cIn the present case, it is to be noted that the use by Budvar of the Budweiser trade mark in the United Kingdom neither has nor is liable to have an adverse effect on the essential function of the Budweiser trade mark owned by Anheuser-Busch\u2026 Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 89\/104 must be interpreted as meaning that the proprietor of an earlier trade mark cannot obtain the cancellation of an identical later trade mark designating identical goods where there has been a long period of honest concurrent use of those two trademarks where, in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, that use neither has nor is liable to have an adverse effect on the essential function of the trade mark which is to guarantee to consumers the origin of the goods or services.\u201d (darts-478-162-A-en)<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n