Korean franchise, Sulbing filed the trademark infringement lawsuit against Chinese company

 

'Sulbing', a successful Korean franchise company,

Korea's Sulbing is a representative dessert cafe brand that has become known as Korean desserts both domestically and overseas. Starting in Busan, Korea in 2013, it has surpassed 490 franchisees within a year. Afterwards, they began to look abroad with the slogan that the most Korean is the most global. Sulbing succeeded in entering into Thailand, Japan, Kuwait, and Canada, starting with China in 2015.

▲ sulbing.com

Sulbing's master franchise (MF) and litigation with partners,

Sulbing entered overseas through a master franchise method that sells business rights by contracts with local partners, rather than by direct entry into overseas markets. When entering China, the business was carried out by signing a contract with Shanghai Yabin Food (上海雅滨食品), a local partner. However, in China, a fake Sulbing brand called ‘Sulbing Element’ (雪冰元素, XUEBING YUANSU) first filed for a trademark and was doing business. When Shanghai Yabin Foods couldn’t make the business properly in China, they filed a lawsuit demanding Sulbing to terminate the contract and return the down payment (contract fee). Shanghai Yabin Food won at the Supreme Court and Sulbing returned the down payment.

▲ sulbing.com

Sulbing's lawsuit to regain the trademark,

Sulbing filed a trademark invalidation trial against Sulbing Element. After half a year hearing, the Trademark Appeal Board (of the State Administration of Industry & Commerce of the People’s Republic of China) raised the hand of South Korea's Sulbing, saying that the trademark of Sulbing Element was invalid. The Trademark Appeal Board judged that Chinese companies had disturbed the trademark registration order and harmed the fair competition order. Sulbing, who has been suffering from fake companies and has not even been able to enter China, is planning to explore the market in the future.

▲ intomark.com
(trademark database of WIPS)
trademark of Suling Element of China

Can Korea get other brands back?

Experts say the decision on Sulbing case gave a glimpse of China's commitment to trademark law. Seong-won Yoo, a renowned patent attorney for Chinese trademark lawsuits, said “the ruling of this case demonstrates China’s determination that trademarks filed for the purpose of infringing on the legitimate rights of others and unfair competition should be regulated by unifying Article 44 of the Chinese Trademark law.

The Chinese company, which had the trademark right of Sulbing Element, also owned trademarks of other Korean brands such as Innisfree, Go Bong-min Kimbab, and KimGane. Hopefully that Korean trademarks that were stolen will be able to return to their real owners.