Civil judgment of the Second People's Court of Zhongshan City, Guangdong Province

    The Second People's Court of Zhongshan City, Guangdong Province

    Written judgment of civil affairs

    (2016) No. 6093, Early Republic of Guangdong 2072

    Plaintiff: Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD., located in Baiyun District, Guangzhou City, Guangdong Province.

    Legal representative: Yao Liangsong, chairman of the board.

    Attorney: Zhai Mingyue, lawyer of Shandong Changping Law Firm.

    Agent AD litem: Wang Ning, lawyer of Shandong Changping Law Firm.

    Defendant: Zhongshan Leidi Electric Appliance Co., LTD., domicile: Xiaolan Town, Zhongshan City, Guangdong Province.

    Legal representative: Mo Xian, company manager.

    Agent AD litem: Ma Yuwen, lawyer of Guangdong Guanghong Law Firm.

    Agent AD litem: Wu Jinying, lawyer of Guangdong Guanghong Law Firm.

    Defendant: Guangdong Opai Technology Co., LTD., Shunde District, Foshan City, Guangdong Province.

    Legal representative: Su Liangzhu, company manager.

    Agent AD litem: Lian Yan, lawyer of Guangdong Bodao Jujia Law Firm.

    Agent AD litem: Liang Zhengping, lawyer of Guangdong Bodao Jujia Law Firm.

    Plaintiff opie household group co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as the European household company) with the defendant in zhongshan sporty) electric appliance co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as the thunder emperor company), the guangdong science and technology co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as the guangdong company) the infringement trademark rights and unfair competition disputes, Hitachi after June 7 in our hospital in 2016, in accordance with the applicable ordinary procedure, on March 15, 2017, in the same year on April 20, public hearing on the trial. At the first trial, wang Ning, the agent AD litem of The plaintiff, Wu Jinying, the agent AD litem of the defendant, and Lian Yan and Liang Zhengping, the agents AD litem of the defendant, attended the trial. At the second hearing, wang Ning, the plaintiff's agent AD litem, Wu Jinying, the defendant's agent AD litem, and Liang Zhengping, the defendant's agent AD litem, attended the proceedings. The case is now closed.

    The plaintiff Opai Furniture Company filed a lawsuit against the court: 1. The defendant Was ordered to stop the sale of disinfection cabinets marked with the words "Guangdong Opai Technology" and "Guangdong Opai Technology Co., LTD"; 2. 2. Order the defendant Guangdong Opai Company to immediately stop the production and sale of disinfection cabinets marked "Guangdong Opai Technology" and "Guangdong Opai Technology Co., LTD"; 3. Judge the defendant Leidi Company and Guangdong Opai Company to compensate the plaintiff Opai Household Company for economic loss and reasonable expense of safeguarding rights of 200,000 yuan. Facts and Reasons: The plaintiff Opie Furniture Co., Ltd. is the holder of the registered trademarks of "OPPEIN" and other registered trademarks of Category 11. The plaintiff opie household company since its inception, after decades of operation, have "European" molded into the household, furniture, electrical appliances, sanitary ware brand known to all, gained the Chinese famous brand, Chinese well-known trademark, such as reputation, in the public mind, "Europe", but not the plaintiff European household products and the representative of the enterprise name symbol, also be instructed the plaintiff sent home company and affiliated enterprise significant recognition of market main body and the sources of identity. In March 2016, the plaintiff Opai Home Furnishing Company found that the defendant Leidi Company sold a large number of disinfection cabinets marked with the words "Guangdong Opai Technology" and "Guangdong Opai Technology Co., LTD" on Alibaba.com. The plaintiff opai Home Furnishing Company applied for evidence preservation in the notary office for the above-mentioned infringement. After further investigation, the plaintiff Opai Furniture Company found that the manufacturer of the above products was the defendant Guangdong Opai Company. To sum up, the defendant sporty) company, guangdong opie clings to the plaintiff for European household company enjoys its reputation as the "European brand", deliberately on the online store, the product the illegal use of the word "Europe", not only infringes upon the plaintiff opie household company's right to exclusive use of a registered trademark, and violate the principles of honesty and credit and recognized business ethics, constituting unfair competition to the plaintiff's sent home company, European household company caused economic losses to the plaintiff. Accordingly, the plaintiff Opai household Company brings a lawsuit to the court, and makes the above lawsuit request. At the first trial, the plaintiff Opai Furniture Company changed the first lawsuit request to order the defendant Leidi Company to immediately stop the production and sale of disinfection cabinets marked with the words "Guangdong Opai Technology" and "Guangdong Opai Technology Co., LTD".

    1. The use of registered Trademark No. 12124262 by the defendant Guangdong Opai Co., Ltd. is lawful and does not infringe the trademark right of opai Household Products Co., Ltd. of the plaintiff. 2. The defendant guangdong Opai Company is a legally registered enterprise. Therefore, the words "Guangdong Opai" and "Guangdong Opai Technology Co., LTD" marked on the online store and products involved by the defendant Leidi Company were legally used and did not constitute unfair competition. 3. First of all, article 9 of the regulations of the notarization procedure rules "notary party means and notarization and have an interest in its own name to the notary agency to apply for notarization" and the provisions of article 13 "notary organ practice areas of the provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the central government of the judicial administrative organ shall appraise", while the entrusted agent mentioned in the case of infringement notarial deed Yang today is not the plaintiff opie household company employees, nor in the notarial deed with Yang today the licensed materials, it does not belong to the notary party, did not have the right to apply for notarization, and notarization is approved area, but the notarial deed issued by FengCheng notarization in laiwu city in shandong province, Violation of the above provisions shall be illegal in procedure; Secondly, notarization is to obtain evidence for rights protection, and the appeal of this case is based on unfair competition rather than intellectual property infringement. The identity of the notary may not be that of the notary. Therefore, this case tort notarial certificate can not be used as evidence. 4. The defendant Leidi Company started production in March and April 2016 after obtaining the authorization of the defendant Guangdong Opai Company. Even if there was infringement, the infringement was short and would not cause material injury to the plaintiff Opai Home Furniture Company, and the cost of the plaintiff opai Home Furniture Company's claim was too high. 5. However, the case should be unfair competition, but the plaintiff ou sent home company (2016) in guangdong of 2072 and early 6094, 6095 cases with the same notarial deed claims the thunder emperor company constitutes unfair competition, SanAn argues that the fact that for the same behavior, therefore, the plaintiff opie household company filed the lawsuit in violation of the principle of anymore. 6. The products involved were purchased from a third party and not manufactured by the defendant Reddy Company. To sum up, the request to dismiss the plaintiff Opai Furniture Company's appeal.

    The guangdong company argue that 1. The shop is open the defendant sporty) company, involved has nothing to do with the defendant guangdong company, the guangdong company is accused of infringing products, don't need to take responsibility, is accused of infringing products marked "European" is guangdong the defendant company enterprise name contained, no prominent, the enterprise name approved by the Ministry of Commerce and industry registration, therefore, the plaintiff opie household company accused the defendant of guangdong opie trademark infringement was not supported. 2. The defendant guangdong company enterprise name was approved on April 30, 2014, the Ministry of Commerce and industry and the formal registration and establishment, the font size, the approval department with the plaintiff European household company approved by the department of the enterprise name belong to guangdong province administration for industry and commerce management, the plaintiff opie household company "European" brand has won the award for the well-known trademark, and guangdong province administration for industry and commerce also already started to its well-known trademark name to protect, but it is still approved the defendant guangdong company enterprise size, prove the defendant guangdong sent the company's name, company name to the plaintiff opie household company well-known trademark constitutes unfair competition. The plaintiff opie household company is engaged in the trademark classification class 20 household industry, production and sales of the products are cabinets, wardrobe, and the defendant guangdong company engaged in the technology industry, both belong to different industries, there is no competition, no evidence shows that after being accused of infringing products production and sales behavior to the plaintiff opie home company of industry and production and sales of damage or loss. Moreover, the production, sales, promotion and promotion of the plaintiff's Opai Household Products are limited to the cabinet and wardrobe products of category 20, while there is no evidence to show that the plaintiff's Opai Household products have been produced, sold and promoted. The "Opai" brand of the plaintiff Opai Furniture Company has not formed a unique corresponding relationship in the electrical industry and is not well-known. Therefore, there is no basis for plaintiff Opai furniture Company to accuse defendant Opai Guangdong of unfair competition. 3. The defendant Guangdong Opai Company authorized the defendant Guangdong Opai Company to use the registered trademark No. 12124262 on April 11, 2016. The production time of the product accused of infringement was before the authorization. 4. The defendant guangdong Opai has authorized actions, which do not indicate that the defendant Guangdong Opai has the ability to produce the products accused of infringement. To sum up, the plaintiff Opai Furniture Company's appeal is unreasonable and groundless, and the request is rejected.

    The parties have provided evidence according to law around the claims, and the court has organized the parties to exchange and cross-examine evidence. The court confirms and supports in the volume the evidence that the parties have no objection. The disputed evidence, we decided as follows: the plaintiff opie household evidence provided by the company: 1. The word no. 347 (2016) lai FengCheng card people notarial deed and word no. 350 (2016) lai FengCheng card people notarial deed and word no. 346 (2016) lai FengCheng card people notarial deed and word no. 348 (2016) lai FengCheng card people notarial deed, have the original check, and are issued by the notary organ, can the plaintiff certified European household source of company's rights, and associated with this case, so we found; 2.(2016) No. 352 notarization certificate of Laifeng City certificate has no connection with the facts to be proved in this case, and the court will not confirm its connection; 3. The approval of the trademark "Opai" as a well-known trademark is issued by the National Trademark Office. There is an original copy for verification, which can prove the popularity of the trademark "Opai" and is related to this case. 4. (2016) Notarization Certificate No. 353 issued by the notarial office after checking the original, and the certificate of honor attached to the notarial certificate can indirectly reflect the popularity of the plaintiff Opai Furniture Company, which is related to this case, which is recognized by the court; 5. (2016) Notarial Certificate No. 357 of Laifengcheng Certificate No. 354 of Laifengcheng Certificate No. 354 of Laifengcheng Certificate no. 354 of Laifengcheng Certificate no. 354 of Laifengcheng Certificate no. 357 of Laifengcheng Certificate No. 354 of Laifengcheng Certificate no. 354 of Laifengcheng Certificate No. 354 of Laifengcheng Certificate No. 354 of Laifengcheng Certificate No. 354 of Laifengcheng Certificate No. 354 of Laifengcheng Certificate No. 6. (2016), word FengCheng card people notarial deed, (2016) no. 355 lai FengCheng card people word notarial deed, no. 356 issued by the notary organ, reflect the plaintiff opie household for companies operating in the process of promotion and the fact that it hired well-known star endorsements, can reflect the plaintiff opie household company profile, in the absence of contrary evidence refute, we found; 7. Information from newspapers and magazines. The report is published to the public, reflecting the plaintiff's advertising and publicity of Opie Furniture Company, and confirming the visibility of the plaintiff, which is recognized by the court; 8. (2016) The Notarial certificate no. 449 of Laifengcheng Certificate is issued by the notarial office and is related to this case. Therefore, the court confirms it. The evidence provided by the defendant: power of attorney and business license, the plaintiff Opai Furniture Co., Ltd. and the defendant Guangdong Opai Co., Ltd. confirm the authenticity of the evidence, so the court confirms it. The evidence provided by the defendant guangdong Opai Company: 1. The trademark certificate, which the plaintiff Opai Furniture Company has no objection to its authenticity, is not related to the unfair competition dispute in this case, so the court will not confirm its relevance; 2. 2. Jiangshan European door industry co., LTD., enterprise information and introduction, wuxi saint treasure vehicle manufacturing co., LTD. Enterprise information and introduction, suzhou Sue the European wood industry co., LTD., enterprise information and introduction, henan opie electric appliance co., LTD. Enterprise information and introduction, opie paint chemical company, European leather goods companies, such as European machinery enterprise information and introduction, use "the European" two characters as an enterprise size series of enterprise information, the use of "European" two characters and has been registered as trademarks right to exclusive use of a series of brand information, has nothing to do with the case dispute to the fact that, in our hospital for its correlation with refusal to acknowledgment; 3. According to a series of reports of serious quality problems of "Opai" brand cabinet products, the defendant guangdong Opai Company did not provide originals for verification, which were all sourced from the Internet. Authenticity and legality cannot be recognized by the court; 4. The court shall not confirm the authorization certificate which has nothing to do with the facts to be proved in this case.

    According to the statement of the parties and the evidence confirmed by examination, the facts confirmed by the court are as follows: Opai Furniture Company was established on July 1, 1994, with the registered capital of RMB 373581112, and its business scope is furniture manufacturing industry. Leidi Company was established on November 6, 2013 with a registered capital of RMB 30,000. Its business scope: production, processing and sales of household appliances and accessories. The enterprise nature of guangdong European company is a limited liability company (natural person sole proprietorship), founded in 2014, on April 30, a registered capital of 10000000 yuan, scope of business of biotechnology products, household appliances, metal products, electrical accessories, water purification equipment, air to water heaters, bathroom supplies, daily necessities, household items, electrical materials, electronic products research and development, processing, manufacturing, sales, etc. Opai Household Products Co., Ltd. is the owner of the registered trademarks no. 4378572, No. 1137521 and No. 1128213, which are approved to be used in the 11th and 20th classes. The approved commodities include gas stoves and kitchen range hoods, etc. The above trademarks are all within the valid period. Opai Household Is the owner of the trademark "OPPEIN" No. 7731876 approved for use in class 11. The products approved for use include kitchen range hoods, etc., and the trademark is within the term of validity.

    On April 24, 2009, the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce recognized the trademark of "Opai" on the sideboard of category 20 of the International Classification of Goods and Services as a well-known trademark. In September 2007, the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People's Government of China awarded opai household cabinet "China famous brand". In October 2008, The Bureau of Quality and Technical Supervision of Guangdong Province awarded Opai household Products as guangdong famous brand cabinet products. In February 2008, "Opai" trademark was recognized as "Famous trademark of Guangdong Province" by Guangdong Famous Trademark Recognition Committee. In December 2012, European home furnishing company by China building decoration association hutch and sanitation engineering committee identified as "2012 China hutch and sanitation 100" "overall kitchen leading enterprises top 10", effective term of a year. In September 2013, The Guangzhou Municipal People's Government awarded Opai the title of "2012 Guangzhou Mayor Quality Award". On December 28, 2014, the case of Opai Furniture Company evaluated by Brand Watch magazine was selected as the silver Award of 2014 Chinese Brand Marketing Case of the Year. In January 2015, Guangdong Home Furnishings Federation and Guangdong Furniture Chamber of Commerce jointly awarded Opai home Furnishing Company the title of "Top 10 Most Valuable Brands" and "Top 10 Innovative Enterprises" in guangdong pan-household field in 2014.

    On October 30, 2012, Europa home furnishing company signed a sponsorship cooperation agreement with Beijing ontime boiling international advertising co., LTD. It was agreed that Europa home furnishing company would sponsor two sets of "exchange space" home decoration fund of CCTV. The contract was performed on January 5, 2013, solstice on December 28, 2013, and the sponsorship advertising fee was RMB 5700000. On July 20, 2013, The Company hired Jiang Wenli as its spokesperson. On November 11, 2013, Europa furniture company signed a TV advertisement release contract with zhejiang zhimei chewen advertising co., LTD. It was agreed that Europa furniture company entrusted zhejiang zhimei chewen advertising co., ltd. to release the advertisement during January 1, 2014 solstice on December 31, 2014. The release medium was cctv-news channel, and the cost was RMB 40463970. In July 2014, the European household company and hunan, hunan radio and television advertising corporation downwind media co., LTD., television advertising project contracts, agreement: European household company commissioned in hunan, hunan radio and television advertising corporation downwind media co., LTD., published "the 10th golden eagle festival closing ceremony and awards" project related advertising, distribution medium for hunan broadcast hunan satellite TV channels, release time is on September 28, 2014 to October 12, 2014, cost $18000000, using the slogan of "there is love, there's a, have the pie". On October 22, 2014, Europa furniture company signed an advertising agency contract with kashgar yinsong culture & media co., LTD. It was agreed that the kashgar yinsong culture & media co., ltd. would act as an agent for Europa furniture company to advertise in cctc-news "global view" on January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015. The agreed fee was 23,970,000 yuan. On November 27, 2014, Europa home furnishing company and Beijing ontime boiling international advertising co., ltd. signed the cooperation agreement on the sponsorship of home decoration fund, which agreed that Europa home furnishing company would sponsor two sets of "exchange space" home decoration fund of CCTV. The contract was performed on April 4, 2015, solstice on March 26, 2016, with the sponsorship advertising fee of RMB 6,000,000.

    In 2010, Opie home Furnishing company put an advertisement in a Cabinet in Shanghai, using the slogan "You have a home, you have love, you have Opi". In 2011, Opai home Furnishing company put advertisements in Linchuan Evening News, Zhuhai Special Zone Newspaper, Anqing Daily, Sales market, Ruili Home furnishing and decoration world respectively, using the slogan "Youjia, Youai, Youopai". The brand spokesperson employed in the above advertising promotion is Jiang Wenli.

    On March 9, 2016, Opai Furniture Company applied for evidence preservation to Fengcheng Notary Office in Laiwu city, Shandong Province. On the same day, in the public notary notary public and staff, under the supervision of the sent home company entrusted agent Yang today use notary office computer in alibaba suppliers for online purchase "zhongshan sporty) electric appliance co., LTD." online sales of alexipharmic ark, Yang today during operation on the relevant page screenshots and videos. Then, under the supervision of the notary on the spot, Yang Jinzhao printed the above screenshots in triplicate and burned the above video files and screenshots in the notary office in triplicate. The notary staff put the above CDS into the evidence bag and affixed the seal of fengcheng Notary Office in Laiwu city, Shandong Province for sealing. On March 14 of the same year, under the supervision of the notary staff, Yang jinchao came to the "Debang" business department on Wenhe Avenue, Laicheng District, Laiwu city. Yang Jinchao picked up the goods in the business department with intact outer packing and marked with the words "embedded cleaning and disinfection cupboard". The notary staff will receive the goods back to the notary office, under the supervision of the notary staff, Yang Today will open the above goods, the packing box marked "Guangdong Opai technology" a disinfection cabinet, a manual, an anti-counterfeiting quality guarantee card. The notary staff sealed the above articles and gave them to Yang Jin Jin for safekeeping. On March 14 of the same year, under the supervision of the notary staff, Yang Jinzhao used the computer of the notary office to confirm receiving the disinfection cabinet sold by the online store of "Zhongshan Leidi Electric Appliance Co., LTD". Yang Jin in the operation of the relevant page for screenshots and video. Then, under the supervision of the notary on the spot, Yang Jinzhao printed the above screenshots in triplicate and burned the above video files and screenshots in the notary office in triplicate. The notary staff put the above CDS into the evidence bag and affixed the seal of fengcheng Notary Office in Laiwu city, Shandong Province for sealing. Fengcheng Notary Office of Laiwu City, Shandong Province issued the notary Certificate of Laifeng City Certificate Minzi No. 449 (2016) to the above facts.

    Through trial examination, the disinfection cabinet and two CDS purchased by the notarization are sealed in good condition, and the seal and seal of the notary office are complete. The front of the packing box is marked with the words "Guangdong Oupai Technology", the packing box is opened on site, and there is a disinfection cabinet, a manual of operation, an anti-counterfeiting quality guarantee card, the disinfection cabinet is marked with the words "Guangdong Oupai Technology", and the product quality guarantee card is marked with the words "Guangdong Oupai Technology Co., LTD". The scene opened the evidence preservation of two envelopes, each has a CD, the scene play the above-mentioned CD, the content is notarized to buy the accused infringement products, confirm the receipt of the screen video. After comparison, the online store in question used the words "Oupai" and "Oupai guangdong" on the product name and description, and the store has passed real-name authentication. The parties have no objection to the above facts. Opai Believes that the words "Opai" and "Guangdong Opai" on the online store involved, as well as the words "Guangdong Opai Technology" on the outer package and body of the products accused of infringement constitute trademark infringement, and the words "Guangdong Opai Technology Co., LTD" on the anti-counterfeiting quality guarantee card constitute unfair competition. Reddy argues that the alleged infringing products were purchased from third parties, but does not provide evidence to prove it. Guangdong Opai represents that it only authorizes The use of the registered trademark No. 12124262 and does not authorise the use of the company name.

    During the trial, both parties failed to provide evidence on the amount of losses suffered by Opai Household Company due to its infringement and the profits made by the infringer due to the infringement. Opai said its reasonable costs include attorney fees (not providing a bill), travel expenses (not providing a bill), notarization fees, and the cost of buying the alleged infringing product.

    The court holds that Reidy company holds that Opai Furniture Company's re-claim of unfair competition on the basis of the same notarial certificate is a duplicate lawsuit. After review, the court finds that this case is inconsistent with the alleged infringing products in the previous case and does not constitute a duplicate lawsuit. Although Opai Furniture Company believed in the trial that the use of the words "Opai" and "Opai Guangdong" in the online store involved in the case constituted trademark infringement, it did not claim in the lawsuit request of this case, and in accordance with the principle of no complaint, the court will not examine it. The focus of the dispute in this case is: 1. Whether the tortious notarial certificate is valid and whether the accused tortious product is sold by Reddy Company; 2. 2. Who produced the products accused of infringement; 3. Whether the ACTS of the two defendants constitute torts; 4. Subject and amount of compensation.

    1. Article 69 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China provides that "legal facts and documents notarized through legal procedures shall be taken as the basis for ascertaining facts by the people's court, unless there is evidence to the contrary which is sufficient to overturn the notarization." In this case, Laidi Company and Guangdong Opai Company did not provide contrary evidence to overturn (2016) the Notarial certificate of Laifeng City Certificate No. 449, so the court affirmed the notarial certificate. The notarial certificate records that the entrusted agent of Opai Furniture Company purchased the alleged infringing products from the online store involved in the case, which was operated by Leidi Company. Leidi Company did not prove that others sold the alleged infringing products in the name of leidi Company. Therefore, the court confirms that the alleged infringing products were sold by Leidi Company.

    2. Anti-counterfeiting accused of infringing products quality warranty card that says the word "guangdong opie technology co., LTD.", the quality of the product warranty card such as instrument of production enterprise information have for consumers to identify the function of product producers or sellers, with a clear point to the nature of the product provider, and we have authorize others to guangdong company foreign production of related products, in guangdong opie company did not provide the rebuttal evidence, we decided that is accused of infringement product by the guangdong company production and sales.

    3. (1) Counterfeiting the registered trademark of others; (3) making unauthorized use of another person's enterprise name or name to mislead others into believing it is another person's commodity ". This case, "Europe" is the European household font size on your company's business name, is also a European household company use of trademark, European household company is the domestic famous furniture production enterprise, in the class 20 tableware on ambry, "European" trademark by the trademark office identified as well-known trademarks, its enterprise also won many honors, such as China's brand-name products, famous trademarks of guangdong province, 2012 China top hutch defends, whole kitchen top ten leading enterprises, 2012 guangzhou mayor quality prize, 2014 guangdong household field top ten most valuable brands, innovation ten strong enterprise honorary title, In CCTV, hunan TV station and other print media for advertising, pay a lot of advertising costs, visible "European" series of products as well as the "European" font size across the country have high visibility, and by the relevant public know, European furniture company's prior rights by "general principles of the civil law of the People's Republic of China" and "anti-unfair competition law of the People's Republic of China". Sporty) sales company, as well as guangdong company production, sales, marked "guangdong science and technology co., LTD." the alexipharmic ark, easily mistaken for the product and make the relevant public European companies there is a link between household, easy to make the relevant public source for products cause confusion and mistakes, damage the legitimate rights and interests of European household company, both the defendant's act clearly violated the unfair competition law of the People's Republic of China, the provisions of article 2 "in the market transaction, an operator shall follow the the principles of voluntariness, equality, fairness, honesty and credit", violated the recognized business ethics in the market transaction, violated European household company enterprise name right, If it is an act of unfair competition, the two defendants shall be liable for torts.

    On the question of whether The trademark infringement is constituted by Laidi Company and Opai Company in Guangdong. First, "the guangdong science and technology" in the word "European" not highlight use, second, "the guangdong science and technology" is short for guangdong opie technology co., LTD., its brand recognition effect is not, therefore, sporty), guangdong European companies on the product packaging, product fuselage annotation "guangdong science and technology" does not constitute a trademark infringement.

    4. The parties failed to provide evidence for the infringer committing ACTS of unfair competition in European furniture company of the actual loss as well as the profits of the infringer, we consider the household company's brand awareness and the infringer's scale of operation, the infringer during the implementation of the nature of the infringement, and the consequences, as well as the degree of subjective fault, European household attorney's fees, incurred by the company to stop infringement notarial fees, travel expenses, the cost of buying infringing material factors, such as our discretionary sporty) company pay compensation to the European household company 30000 yuan (including reasonable expense to stop the infringement), Guangdong Opai shall pay an indemnity of RMB 100,000 to Opai Furniture Company (including reasonable expenses for preventing infringement).

    To sum up, in accordance with the general principles of the civil law of the People's Republic of China, in the second paragraph of the first paragraph of article one hundred and thirty-four, the law of the People's Republic of China against unfair competition law "article 2, article 5, paragraph 1, paragraph 3, article 20, the supreme people's court on the trial of civil cases of unfair competition" the explanation of application of law in the first article, article 4, article 6, paragraph 1 of article 17, and the civil procedure law of the People's Republic of China, article sixty-nine of the first paragraph of article sixty-four of the act, the decision is as follows:

    I. The defendant, Zhongshan Leidi Electric Appliance Co., LTD., shall immediately stop the sale of disinfection cabinets marked "Guangdong Opai Technology Co., LTD." as of the date of the legal effect of this judgment;

    2. The defendant guangdong Opai Technology Co., Ltd. immediately stopped the production and sale of disinfection cabinets marked "Guangdong Opai Technology Co., Ltd." as of the date of the legal effect of this judgment;

    3. The defendant, Zhongshan Leidi Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. shall, within 5 days from the date of the legal effect of this judgment, pay compensation of RMB 30,000 to the plaintiff, Opai Household Group Co., LTD. (including reasonable expenses for preventing infringement);

    Iv. The defendant guangdong Opai Technology Co., Ltd. shall, within 5 days from the date of the legal effect of this judgment, pay the plaintiff OPai Home Furnance Group Co., LTD., a compensation of RMB 100,000 (including reasonable expenses paid to stop infringement);

    V. Rejecting other claims of the plaintiff opai Furniture Group Co., LTD.

    If the pecuniary obligation is not performed within the period specified in this judgment, the interest on the debt for the delayed period shall be doubled in accordance with article 253 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.

    The case handling fee is 4,300 yuan, 20% of which is 860 yuan borne by the plaintiff Opai Household Group Co., LTD., 20% of which is 860 yuan borne by the defendant Zhongshan Leidi Electric Appliance Co., LTD., and 60% of which is 2,580 yuan borne by the defendant Guangdong Opai Technology Co., LTD.

    If you are not satisfied with this judgment, you may, within 15 days from the date of serving the judgment, file an appeal to the court, and make copies of the appeal according to the number of the other party or the representatives, and appeal to the Intermediate People's Court of Zhongshan city, Guangdong Province.

    Guo Ning, chief judge

    People's Juror Wu Haisheng

    People's juror Chen Yan

    May 4, 2017

    Clerk Lu Guotang