Civil judgment of Qingdao Intermediate People's Court in Shandong Province

    Qingdao Intermediate People's Court of Shandong Province

    Written judgment of civil affairs

    (2018) Lu 02, 181 of the Early Republic of China

    Plaintiff: Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD., No. 366, Guanghua 3rd Road, Baiyun District, Guangzhou.

    Legal representative: Yao Liangsong, chairman of the board.

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

    Attorney: Yang Fudong, lawyer of Shandong Changping Law Firm.

    Defendant: Shengbailun Huwei Business House, Longhu Town, Xinzheng City, Store No. 1-68 and 69, Zone 6B, South China City, Longhu Town, Xinzheng City, Henan Province.

    Operator: Xu Fuchao.

    Defendant: Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., LTD., Room 187-1010, Jinshui Road, Licang District, Qingdao.

    Legal representative: Zheng Jianfeng, General Manager.

    Agent AD litem: Long Haifeng, lawyer of Zhongda Law Office in Guangdong.

    Defendant: Foshan Shiwang Electric Appliance Co., LTD., 2nd Floor, No. 11, Xinfa Road, High-tech Zone, Ronggui Huakou Neighborhood Committee, Shunde District, Foshan City.

    Legal representative: Zheng Huan, manager.

    Agent AD litem: Long Haifeng, lawyer of Zhongda Law Office in Guangdong.

    Defendant: Shenzhen Jiulong Opaiyi Electric Appliance Co., LTD., Huatongyuan International Logistics Center, Minzhi Avenue, Minzhi Street, Longhua New District, Shenzhen.

    Legal representative: He Jianlan.

    The plaintiff opie household group co., LTD., and the defendant xinzheng longhu town, Qingdao st hk Aaron hutch defends firms opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD., foshan shipping magnate electric appliance co., LTD., shenzhen opie a electric appliance co., LTD., Kowloon infringement trademark and unfair competition disputes, we adjudicated in accordance with the applicable ordinary procedure, on July 2, 2018 public hearing on the trial. Plaintiff opie household group co., LTD., to entrust agents AD litem Yang xinzheng FuDong, the defendant xu longhu town of st hk Aaron hutch defends business operators FuChao and defendant Qingdao opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD., the defendant of foshan shipping magnate electric appliance co., LTD. Jointly entrust agents AD litem Long Haifeng to appear in court took part in the litigation, the defendant shenzhen opie a electric appliance co., LTD., Kowloon through our summons, did not appear in court to participate in the litigation. The case is now closed.

    Opie household group co., LTD to our lawsuit request: 1, the defendant xinzheng longhu town st hk Aaron hutch defends businesses to stop selling immediately violate the plaintiff 7731876 trademarks and marked as "Qingdao opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD.", "the home has love Qingdao opie" words constitute ACTS of unfair competition involved gas cookers, and immediately stop when the store store signs, store decoration infringes upon the plaintiff no. 1137521, no. 4378572 trademark rights behavior; 2. Order the defendant Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. and the defendant Foshan Shuiwang Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. to immediately stop the production and sales of gas stoves that infringe on the trademark No. 7731876 enjoyed by the plaintiff and mark the words "Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., Ltd." and "You have A Family and love Qingdao Opai" to constitute unfair competition; 3. Order the defendant Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., LTD to stop unfair competition immediately, namely change the enterprise name immediately, and the changed enterprise name shall not contain the word "Opai"; 4. Order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for the economic loss and reasonable expense of safeguarding the rights, totaling RMB 200,000 yuan; 5. Order the costs of the case to be borne by the defendant. Facts and Reasons: Founded in 1994, the plaintiff is a comprehensive domestic integrated service provider of modern integrated household, whose products cover the fields of integrated wardrobe, kitchen appliances, integrated bathroom, commercial kitchen utensils and so on. The plaintiff is the registered trademark holder of "OPPEIN" and "OPPEIN". After decades of painstaking operation, the plaintiff has turned "OPPEIN" into a household, electrical and sanitary brand known throughout the country. The brand has won "China famous brand products", "China famous trademark" and other good reputation. "Have a family, have love, have Europe" this slogan has a very high influence in the consumer, and has been fully affirmed. In the eyes of the relevant public, "Opai" has not only become the representative symbol of the plaintiff's products and enterprise names, but also become a significant identification mark indicating the market subject and commodity source of the plaintiff and its affiliated enterprises.

    In September 2017, according to the investigation of the plaintiff, the words "Opie" and "Opie kitchen and Bathroom" were highlighted on the store signboards, interior decoration, shelves and other places of the store, while the household gas cooker products were sold in the store. Involved in household type gas cooker products packaging box marked "Qingdao opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD.", "OPPENTLE", "home, love, Qingdao opie" wording, etc, and the plaintiff signed jiang wenli endorsement image picture, the place such as panel cookers products, products involved sign marked "Kowloon, shenzhen opie electric appliance co., LTD.", "OPPEIMDQ", "opie, Kowloon" and other words. In addition, the name card wholesale project obtained on the spot shows the words "European kitchen and sanitary appliances", etc., and the plaintiff entrusts the notary office to carry out evidence preservation for the above behavior. After investigation, the store involved in the case was operated by saint Bailun Huwei Firm in Longhu Town, Xinzheng City. The products involved were produced by Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., LTD., Foshan Shiwang Electric Appliance Co., LTD., and Shenzhen Kowloon Opai Electric Appliance Co., LTD.

    In conclusion, the plaintiff believes that the trademark rights of the plaintiff were infringed by the use of the word "Eu pai" in the business premises of the defendant St. Bailun Huwei in Longhu Town, Xinzheng City and the production and sale of the products involved in the case by the defendant. At the same time, the defendant Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. registered the enterprise name and advertising language with the name of "Opai" without justified reasons and used the plaintiff's original star endorsement image without justified reasons, which was enough to cause market confusion; The defendant, Shengbailun Huwei Firm in Longhu Town, Xinzheng City, used the word "Opai" without justified reasons and sold the products involved in the above logo at the same time, which violated the principle of good faith and recognized business ethics, and the above behaviors constituted unfair competition. Therefore, in order to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests, the plaintiff appealed to the court, the request to judge as requested. At the trial, the plaintiff withdrew the lawsuit against the defendant Shenzhen Jiulong Opai Electric Appliance Co., LTD., and the court granted permission.

    The defendant, Shengbailun Huwei Firm in Longhu Town, Xinzheng City, replied: I served in the army from 1998 to 2014, and entered the industry after retirement. I got the business license on June 30, 2016, and did not do it until the Spring Festival in 2018 due to poor management. Personal knowledge of intellectual property is insufficient, they purchase goods from others and then sell them. The factory sales personnel sell Ope door-to-door. I have no way of knowing whether the plaintiff violated the exclusive right to use the registered trademark involved in the case.

    The defendant Qingdao Opai Juneng Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. replied that: the plaintiff's claim has no facts and legal basis. The respondent is a company legally registered by the Industrial and Commercial Bureau. This case is a trademark infringement dispute, unfair competition does not belong to the scope of the case; Since the respondent has no infringement facts, the plaintiff's request for the respondent to compensate for the economic loss and the reasonable expense of safeguarding the rights has no factual basis; Even if the products sold by Defendant 1 May be infringing, the claim for compensation of 200,000 yuan is too high.

    The defendant, Foshan Shiwang Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. replied that: the respondent has never produced the products involved, nor has it conducted any transaction with Respondent 1, so this case has nothing to do with the respondent, and there is no factual basis for the plaintiff to ask the respondent to bear the responsibility.

    The parties submitted evidence according to law, and the court organized the two parties to exchange and cross-examine evidence. As for the evidence that the parties have no objection, the Court confirms and supports in the volume. As for the evidence that the parties have disputes, the Court finds as follows:

    Plaintiff 14, trademark registration information printouts of evidence, the content of the product labeling OPPENTLE two registered by the trademark registration information, which use the registered trademark for the preliminary examination announcement no. 24832458 and approved goods does not include the kitchen burning gas, prove that the products involved with the identity of the defendant 2 registered, further verify the products involved is the fact that the defendant produced at the same time prove the identity of the product label has not registered success and the design of fail to apply for use. Defendant 1 testified: it is not clear that it is true. The defendant 2 cross-examination said, according to the evidence that OPPENTLE has passed the state administration of trademark registration of trademarks, the product category for the electric cooker, cookers, kitchen smoke lampblack machine, cooling equipment and device, air purification equipment and machines, disinfection equipment and so on, the plaintiff said that the existence of infringement, a packaging and OPPENTLE is legally registered, so the packaging there is no infringement. We have repeatedly stated that the packing case is not produced by D2 nor sold by D2, and the company name and address shown on the outer package cannot be regarded as infringement by D2. D2 is legally registered. All information is published online, and the public can check relevant information online. Defendant 3 cross-examined that: has nothing to do with us. The court confirms the authenticity of the evidence, and the content of the proof will be discussed in the following part.

    Based on the evidence confirmed by the Court according to law and the statements of both parties, the Court determines the following facts according to law:

    The plaintiff opie household group co., LTD., founded in 1994, on July 1, the registered capital is three hundred and seventy-three million five hundred and eighty-one thousand one hundred and twelve yuan, business scope is: wooden furniture manufacturing, rattan furniture manufacturing, metal furniture manufacturing, household electrical appliances manufacture, kitchen appliances and daily groceries retail, kitchen equipment and kitchen supplies wholesale, etc.

    Guangzhou Oupai Kitchen Cabinet Enterprise Co., Ltd. obtained the exclusive right to use the registered trademark "Oupai" No. 4378572 on June 7, 2007. The approved products are class 11 gas stoves, microwave ovens, etc. The registration is valid until June 6, 2017. On March 24, 2014, the registered trademark change was Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD. On December 21, 1997, Guangzhou Kangjie Kitchen Equipment Co., Ltd. obtained the exclusive right to use the registered trademark "Opai" no. 1137521, and approved the use of the goods for the category 11 kitchen stoves, gas stoves, etc. The term of validity of the trademark was renewed until December 20, 2007. On November 7, 2007, the trademark was renewed for a period of validity up to December 20, 2017. On March 24, 2014, the registered trademark change was Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD. Guangdong Opai Group Co., Ltd. obtained the exclusive right to use the registered trademark "OPPEIN" No. 7731876 on March 14, 2011, and approved the use of category 11 ceiling lights, ovens, cooking utensils, gas stoves, water heaters, etc. The registration is valid until March 13, 2021. On March 20, 2012, guangdong Opai Furniture Group Co., LTD registered the trademark change. On March 24, 2014, the registered trademark change was Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD. On April 24, 2009, the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce recognized guangzhou Oupai Cabinet Enterprise Co., Ltd. as a well-known trademark of the registered trademark "Oupai" on the sideboard goods of category 20 of the International Classification of Goods and Services for trademark registration.

    In September 2007, the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People's Republic of China awarded the Opai household cabinet produced by Guangzhou Opai Kitchen Cabinet Enterprise Co., Ltd. as "China's famous brand products". In October 2008, Guangdong Provincial Bureau of Quality and Technical Supervision granted Oupai household cabinets manufactured by Guangzhou Oupai Kitchen Cabinet Enterprise Co., Ltd. as "Guangdong famous brand products"; Guangzhou Oupai Kitchen Cabinet Enterprise Co., LTD. No. 1128213, "Oupai", was recognized as a famous trademark of Guangdong province by Guangdong Famous Trademark Recognition Committee. In December 2012, China building decoration Association hutch and sanitation Engineering Committee awarded Guangdong Opai Household Group Co., LTD. "2012 China top 100 hutch and sanitation", "overall kitchen leading enterprises top 10" title; In September 2013, Guangzhou Municipal People's Government issued the "2012 Guangzhou Mayor's Quality Award" certificate to Guangdong Opai Furniture Group Co., LTD. On December 28, 2014, the plaintiff's case of "Scientific Planning of European Group leading the Second Revolution of the furniture Industry through the Strategy of European Group Leading the Furniture Industry" evaluated by Brand Watch magazine was selected as the Silver Award of the 2014 Chinese Brand Marketing Case of the Year. In January 2015, Guangdong Provincial Home Industry Federation and Guangdong Furniture Chamber of Commerce awarded the plaintiff the honor certificate of "Top ten Enterprises with Innovation Ability" and "Top Ten Brands with Most Value".

    On October 30, 2012, the plaintiff and Beijing onspot boiling international advertising co., ltd. signed the sponsorship and cooperation agreement on the home decoration fund of 2013 "exchange space", which agreed that on January 5, 2013, solstice and December 28, 2013, the plaintiff's brand would be promoted in the second set of "exchange space" column of CCTV, with the advertising fee of RMB 5.7 million. On November 6, 2013, the plaintiff and zhejiang zhimei car advertising co., ltd. signed a television advertising release contract, which agreed that the plaintiff's brand would be publicized on CCTV news channel on January 1, 2014 and the advertising fee would be four thousand four hundred and sixty-three thousand nine hundred and seventy yuan. In July 2014, the plaintiff signed a TV project advertising release contract with hunan radio and television advertising corporation and hunan shunfeng media co., LTD. The contract agreed that on September 28, 2014, solstice, November 12, 2014, the plaintiff's brand would be promoted in related columns of the closing ceremony and award evening of the 10th golden eagle festival of hunan satellite TV, with an advertising fee of 18 million yuan. On October 22, 2014, the plaintiff signed an advertising agency contract with kashgar yinsong culture media co., LTD. The agreement agreed that on January 1, 2015, solstice, December 31, 2015, the plaintiff's brand would be publicized on CCTV news channel, and the advertising fee would be 23,970 yuan. The plaintiff promoted the "Opi" brand in the "Decorate the World" published in April 2014. The plaintiff still hires Jiang Wenli to produce to the plaintiff "Europe sends" the ambry of the brand, wardrobe, defend bath product to undertake advertisement speaks.

    On September 4, 2017, in laiwu city in shandong province FengCheng notarization notaries zhang, xu notarial personnel supervision, the entrusted agent of the applicant, the shou-zhen wang in the name of ordinary consumers come to henan xinzheng longhu town south China city 6 b area - 1-68, no. 69 "opie cherry blossom new flyer hutch defends electric appliance stores," shou-zhen wang in the shop to buy a marked "Qingdao opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD." with the words of kitchen burning gas, also bought other water heater, gas burner (has nothing to do with the case), on the spot in the store credit card slip issued an inventory, sales and printed with the word "xu FuChao" card. Wang Shouzhen took six photos of the shop inside and outside. After the end of the above-mentioned ACTS, Under the supervision of the notary, Wang Shouzhen took 29 photos of the above-mentioned articles, which were sealed by the notary, and Wang Shouzhen took 4 photos of the appearance of the sealed articles, which were kept by Wang Shouzhen. Fengcheng Notary Office of Laiwu city, Shandong Province issues (2017) The Notary Certificate of Laifengcheng Certificate Minzi No. 1447 for the above process.

    Another investigation, the defendant xinzheng Longhu Town St. Bailun huwei firm registration date is October 26, 2016, the type of individual industrial and commercial households, business scope for kitchen appliances, hardware, plumbing, bathroom sales. The defendant Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. was established on April 12, 2016. Its legal representative is Zheng Jianfeng. Its registered capital is 300,000 YUAN. The defendant, Foshan Shiwang Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. was established on April 27, 2015. Its legal representative is Zheng Huan. Its registered capital is 100,000 yuan.

    Opened in court accused of infringing products, the more visible outside packing with black bold font marked "OPPENTLE" and "the home has love Qingdao Europe clique", more than outer packing sealing tape with the defendant opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD. Qingdao enterprise name, packing side with "Qingdao opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD. (logo)", "manufacturers shipping magnate electric appliance co., LTD.", and the corresponding address, the address information, packing boxes on both sides with jiang wenli endorsement pictures.

    The court believes that the focus of the dispute in this case is: 1. Whether the actions of each defendant infringe upon the exclusive right of registered trademark no. 4378572, No. 1137521 and No. 7731876 enjoyed by the plaintiff; 2. Ii. Whether the behavior of the defendant Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. constitutes unfair competition, and whether it should change the enterprise name; If it constitutes an infringement, whether the defendants should bear and how to bear civil liability.

    Focus on one, the trademark law of the People's Republic of China article 57 in the second paragraph: without the permission of the trademark registrant, used on the same kind of goods with similar trademark registered trademark, or on the similar products to use its registered trademark identical or similar trademarks, easy to cause confusion, the use of a registered trademark infringement.

    In this case, is accused of infringing products packing with black bold font marked "OPPENTLE" logo, the "OPPENTLE" logo with the plaintiff has no. 7731876 "OPPEIN" registered trademark, the similar on the letters, arranging, and was accused of infringing products and the registered trademark of the plaintiff enjoy range approved to use the same, for the same goods, to ordinary consumers view, easy to cause confusion, so that the mistake is the plaintiff products or with product has relevance, therefore, The alleged infringing product shall be deemed as infringing the exclusive right to use the registered trademark "OPPEIN" no. 7731876 enjoyed by the plaintiff. The defendant, Saint Bailen Huwei Firm in Longhu Town, Xinzheng City, sold the infringement products involved in the case. Therefore, its behavior violated the exclusive right to use the registered trademark "OPPEIN" no. 7731876 enjoyed by the plaintiff. The place such as the other, their brand in the stores, the shelves with a word "Europe", the no. 4378572 with the plaintiff "Europe", 1137521 "European" registered trademark, the font is slightly different, only overall very approximate, easy to cause confusion or mistake, therefore, the behavior violated at the same time the plaintiff no. 4378572, 1137521th of a registered trademark.

    Concerning the second focus, article 58 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that: where a registered trademark of another person or an unregistered well-known trademark is used as the shop name of an enterprise, thus misleading the public and constituting an act of unfair competition, the case shall be dealt with in accordance with the Law of the People's Republic of China against Unfair Competition. Since the infringement in this case occurred before the enforcement of the current Law of the People's Republic of China against Unfair Competition, the Law of the People's Republic of China against Unfair Competition, which took effect on December 1, 1993, shall be applied in this case. Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China (which came into force on December 1, 1993) stipulates that business operators shall abide by the principles of voluntariness, equality, fairness, honesty and credibility and observe generally recognized business ethics in their market transactions. In this case, the plaintiff is the holder of the "European" registered trademark, the trademark has certain market popularity, the defendant opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD. Qingdao will be the same as the plaintiff's registered trademark of the word "ou" for the enterprise name registration in font size, and used on the same commodity, its behavior is enough to make the relevant public to mistake the Qingdao opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD., there is a specific relationship with the plaintiff, then the product mix of the two for the same product market main body, harmed the plaintiff to "European" trademark rights, violates the principle of good faith, has violated the recognized business ethics, unfair competition, It shall bear the civil liability for ceasing to use or changing the enterprise name according to law.

    Focus on three, we think, more than product outer packing sealing tape with the defendant opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD. Qingdao enterprise name, and packing side with "Qingdao opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD. (logo)", "manufacturers shipping magnate electric appliance co., LTD.", and the corresponding address, the address information, therefore, be held to the product is the defendant involved Qingdao opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD., the defendant foshan shipping magnate electric appliance co., LTD., production and sales together, Its labeling of "OPPENTLE" on the products it produces and sells violates the exclusive right to use the registered trademark "OPPEIN" No. 7731876 of the plaintiff, and its labeling of "Qingdao Oppe Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., LTD" also constitutes unfair competition. Therefore, it should bear the civil liability to stop the infringement and compensate for the loss according to law.

    On the question of the amount of compensation for the loss. Article 63 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China provides that the amount of compensation for the infringement of the exclusive right to use a trademark shall be determined according to the actual loss suffered by the right holder as a result of the infringement. Where the actual loss is difficult to determine, it may be determined in accordance with the profits the infringer has gained from the infringement; The amount of compensation shall include the reasonable expenses paid by the right to stop the infringement. If it is difficult to determine the actual losses suffered by the obligee as a result of the infringement, the interests gained by the infringer as a result of the infringement, or the licensing fee of the registered trademark, the people's court shall, in light of the circumstances of the infringing act, make a judgment to pay compensation of not more than THREE million yuan. The supreme people's court on some issues of applicable law in trademark civil dispute cases to explain "stipulated in article 16, when determining the amount of compensation, the people's court should consider the nature of the infringement, during the period, the consequences, the reputation of the trademark, the trademark license fee amount and type of trademark licensing, time, scope and to stop the infringing act reasonable expenses of the factors such as comprehensive. Article 20 of the Law of the People's Republic of China against Unfair Competition stipulates that if a business operator violates the provisions of this Law and causes damage to the injured business operator, it shall be liable for damages. If it is difficult to calculate the losses of the injured business operator, the amount of compensation shall be the profits made by the infringer during the period of infringement. It shall also bear the reasonable expenses paid by the injured operator for investigating the ACTS of unfair competition committed by the operator which infringe upon its lawful rights and interests.

    In this case, the plaintiff failed to evidence to prove that the loss of its situation, also failed to prove the defendant's tort profit amount of proof, as a result, according to the law, our college in view of the plaintiff's trademark value degree, the defendant's subjective fault, tort, period, consequences, and the properties of the plaintiff reasonable expense for stopping the infringement of the defendant, determined the defendant Qingdao opie shaped electric appliance co., LTD., foshan city, the defendant shipping magnate electric appliance co., LTD. Jointly to compensate the plaintiff economic loss of 80000 yuan, the defendant xinzheng longhu town st hk Aaron hutch defends firms to compensate the plaintiff economic loss of 20000 yuan.

    In conclusion, according to the law of the People's Republic of China civil law article one hundred and eighteen, article one hundred and thirty-four, paragraph 1 (1) and (7), the trademark law of the People's Republic of China article sixty-three, article 57 and article 58, "anti-unfair competition law of the People's Republic of China" (come into force on December 1, 1993), article 2, article 20, the Supreme People's Court on some issues of applicable law in trademark civil dispute cases to explain, article 16 of the act, the decision is as follows:

    I. The defendant, Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., LTD., and the defendant, Foshan Shiwang Electric Appliance Co., LTD., shall immediately stop the production and sale of products that infringe upon the exclusive right to use the registered trademark no. 7731876 of the plaintiff, Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD., and the words "Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., LTD.";

    Ii. As of the effective date of this judgment, the defendant, Shengbailun Huwei Firm in Longhu Town, Xinzheng City, immediately stopped selling the products that infringed the exclusive right to use the registered trademark of the plaintiff, Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD. No. 7731876 and marked with the words "Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., LTD."; And immediately stop infringing upon the exclusive right to use the plaintiff's registered trademark No. 4378572 and no. 1137521 on shop signs and shelves;

    Iii. The defendant Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. immediately stopped using the word "Opai" in its enterprise name as of the effective date of this judgment, and changed its enterprise name within 10 days from the effective date of this judgment. The changed enterprise name shall not contain the same or similar words as "Opai";

    Iv. The defendant, Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. and the defendant, Foshan Shiwang Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. shall compensate the plaintiff, Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., Ltd. for the economic loss of RMB 80,000 within ten days from the effective date of this judgment;

    V. The defendant, Shengbailun Huwei Firm in Longhu Town, Xinzheng City, shall compensate the plaintiff, Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., Ltd. for the economic loss of RMB 20,000 within ten days from the effective date of this judgment;

    Vi. 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, 1,075 yuan borne by the plaintiff Opai Household Group Co., LTD., 645 yuan borne by the defendant Shengbailun Huwei Firm in Longhu Town, Xinzheng City, and 2,580 yuan jointly borne by the defendant Qingdao Opai Jueneng Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. and the defendant Foshan Shiwang Electric Appliance 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 a copy according to the number of the other party and appeal to the Shandong Higher People's Court.

    Wang Yan, Chief judge

    Judge Guo Jing

    People's Juror Liu Jing

    September 7, 2008

    Clerk Chen Dong

    Clerk Li Youjia