KR101972978B1 - Evaluation method of trademark mortgage value Version 2 - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to a trademark mortgage value evaluating method which includes a financial model as a basis for calculating past values and a marketing model as a basis for calculating current and future values and applies a weight value to give weight to the financial model and the marketing model so as to be objective and reliable. The present invention includes: a step (1) of storing the operating profit analysis trademark value (F_Excessreturn) of an evaluation target trademark transmitted or stored through a communication network, a conjoint analysis trademark value (M_conj.), the weight value (a) of a conjoint analysis trademark, and the weight value (b) and coordination cost (AC) of an operating profit analysis trademark in a database and then storing the same in a storage medium; and a step (2) of reading out the operating profit analysis trademark value (F_Excessreturn), the conjoint analysis trademark value (M_conj.), the weight value (a) of the conjoint analysis trademark, and the weight value (b) and coordination cost (AC) of the operating profit analysis trademark from the database, inputting the duration (n), tax, and discount rate (r) of the corresponding trademark, and evaluating the value of the corresponding trademark by executing a computer programming thereon with equation 1.

Description

{Evaluation method of trademark mortgage value Version 2}

The present invention relates to a method for evaluating trademark security value, and in particular, includes a financial model as a basis for calculating past value and a marketing model as a basis for calculating present and future values. This study relates to an objective and reliable method of evaluating the value of collateral for trademark rights by applying weights to assign weight to them.

In general, a brand can be defined as a name, language, signal, symbol, design, or a combination of which is distinct from competing third-party products and is shaped by the specification of the sales group or seller's products and services. have.

Moreover, due to the development of the Internet, the first contact point of consumers and companies on the Internet is the domain and brand, as the environment of the enterprise is going from off-line to on-line or registering as a new company online. As a result, especially in cyberspace, the value of a brand acts as an important component when measuring the value of a company's assets.

Therefore, even when trying to measure the value of a company, a number of countries outside the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and the European Union allow the inclusion of brand value in intangible assets as well as tangible assets. The Simon and Sullivan model, an accounting measure, is being used. The brand asset measurement method of the Simon and Sullivan models measured brand assets using the advertising cost, the number of years of establishment of the company, the order of entry into the market, and the advertising expenditure compared to the competitors, and the advertising cost compared to the competitors. Since consumers are heavily influenced by brand awareness by spending, the advertising expenditure variable compared to the competitors described as an important factor in the measurement of brand assets.

However, the conventional Simon and Sullivan models do not accurately measure and verify the brand value of a company because the components that act as variables do not reflect the changing economic situation in the intangible asset brand measurement method. There is a problem.

In addition, conventional methods centered on financial models or conventional methods centered on marketing models have the disadvantage that the evaluation itself is impossible if the value is negative.

Since 2008, as the global economy has struggled with subprime mortgages on US real estate, discussions about non-real estate collateral have begun to emerge to save businesses, which has led to interest in collateral loans.

Security intellectual property refers to patents, designs, trademarks, trade secrets, and copyrights owned by business owners. It is a system that provides loans to banks by providing the intellectual property rights, etc., as collateral to banks and evaluating their value.

On June 11, 2012, the enforcement of the Act on the Security of Property, Bonds, etc., and the Special Cases on Intellectual Property Rights provided the legal basis for intellectual property security financing. By law, various intellectual property rights (IP) such as patents, trademarks, and designs can be provided as collateral, providing a foundation for implementing various IP financial models.

However, at present, there is not enough review and research on the remaining rights and valuations except for patent rights.

Market-oriented IP mortgage financing was mainly technology-oriented, but there was a lack of measures to promote the commercialization of trademark rights that SMEs could use most practically in the short term. As a result, there is still a need for the development of an objective and reliable method for evaluating the value of trademark collateral to establish a financial collateral for trademark rights, in particular an evaluation method that can objectively reflect consumer preferences in the value of trademark collateral.

The present invention has been made to solve the above problems of the prior art, and an object of the present invention is to provide an objective and reliable method for evaluating collateral security value.

The method of evaluating trademark collateral value according to the present invention includes: (1) operating profit analysis of a trademark to be evaluated or transmitted through a communication network; F _Excessreturn , conjoint analysis trademark value (M _conj. ), Conjoint analysis trademark right Storing the weights (a), the weights of the operating profit analysis trademark rights (b) and the adjustment costs (AC) in a database and storing them in a storage medium; (2) Operating profit analysis trademark value (F _Excessreturn ), conjoint analysis trademark value (M _conj. ), Weight of conjoint analysis trademark (a), weight of operating profit analysis trademark (b) and adjustment costs from the database ( Reading AC), inputting the duration (n), tax and discount rate (r) of the trademark, and performing computer programming using the following Equation 1 to evaluate the collateral value of the trademark; And (3) the preference and / or non-favorability of the trademark, based on the number of times of input of keywords in the consumer's positive and / or negative sense with respect to the trademark received or stored over the network during the evaluation of the security value of the trademark. Storing the database of the database on a storage medium, and applying weights of the preferences and / or non-favorites to the collateral value of the trademarks obtained in the step (2), respectively, to apply weights related to consumer preferences.

[Equation 1]

The preference of a trademark is valued within the range of 0 to 100% in proportion to the number of times a user inputs a keyword of a positive meaning of the keyword transmitted or stored through the network during the evaluation of the security value of the trademark. Can be displayed.

The non-preferability of a trademark is reduced within the range of 0 to 100% in proportion to the number of times a unit enters a negative keyword of a consumer that is transmitted or stored through the network during the evaluation of the security value of the trademark. Can be displayed.

The conjoint analysis trademark value M _{conj .} May be a value calculated using Equation 2 below:

[Equation 2]

Conjoint Analysis Trademark Value = Marketing Trademark Operating Profit Value = Valuable Trademark Sales * Operating Profit Margin Before Adjustment * Adjusted Trademark Utility = Trademark Contribution

In Equation 2, the evaluation target trademark utility is a numerical value of the various attributes of the trademark right through the advice or interview of the expert group.

The operating profit analysis trademark value F _Excessreturn may be a value calculated using Equation 3 below:

[Equation 3]

Operating Profit Analysis Trademark Value = Value that reflects AHP's share of trademark operating profit by marketing evaluation and trademark operating profit by financial evaluation

The joint analysis trademark weight and operating profit analysis trademark weight may be values calculated by an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) of trademark evaluation experts.

The adjustment cost may be the sum of the advertising costs and the trademark costs.

In particular, it may include storing the registration of the trademark rights, the duration of the registered trademark rights received from the database associated with the trademarks of the respective patent offices and treaties of Madrid through the communication network.

It is also possible to apply Equation 4 below, which considers the deduction element and the addition element together instead of Equation 1 above, which only considers the trademark value deduction factor (TVSF).

[Equation 4]

In the above formula, the ratio of the trademark under evaluation among the trademarks possessed by the TVDF, the coefficient for verifying whether the trademark under evaluation is the main trademark of the enterprise, the MTR adjust, and the future value of the trademark under evaluation. Is selected from the coefficient to verify (FVV adjust) and the coefficient to verify for securitization of the trademark under consideration (TV adjust), and the trademark addition factor (TVAF) It is a coefficient to add.

According to the present invention, it includes a financial model as a basis for calculating the past value and a marketing model as a basis for calculating the present and future values, and a weight for assigning a weight to these financial models and the marketing model. It is effective in providing an objective and reliable method of evaluating the value of trademark security.

In particular, according to the present invention, it is helpful to calculate a balanced value for a trademark by weighting a financial model as a basis for calculating past values and a marketing model as a basis for calculating current and future values. In evaluating collateral value, it provides an objective and reliable method for evaluating the value of trademark collateral value. In particular, it provides an evaluation method to objectively reflect consumer preferences in the value of trademark collateral.

1 is a diagram that can confirm that the operating profit and brand profits move most similarly.
2 is a diagram showing the results of the Madrid search for Codez Combine.
3 is a diagram showing results of the Codes Combine KOSDAQ.

Hereinafter, exemplary embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings.

A brand is a factor that increases sales and at the same time reduces costs. Increasing sales is the value that creates demand, and the factor that reduces costs is the value that reduces marketing-related costs during marketing activities. In evaluating the value of brand rights (brand value, brand profit), the analysis of listing (4,845) and KOSDAQ (1,739) over the past 10 years (1992-2001) shows that operating profit and brand profit Since it appears to move similarly, it is one of the features of the present invention to confirm that it is suitable for use as a substitute for brand profit and to utilize it. Figure 1 shows a chart that can confirm that the operating profit and brand profits move most similarly.

The method of evaluating trademark collateral value according to the present invention includes: (1) operating profit analysis of a trademark to be evaluated or transmitted through a communication network; F _Excessreturn , conjoint analysis trademark value (M _conj. ), Conjoint analysis trademark right Storing the weights (a), the weights of the operating profit analysis trademark rights (b) and the adjustment costs (AC) in a database and storing them in a storage medium; (2) Operating profit analysis trademark value (F _Excessreturn ), conjoint analysis trademark value (M _conj. ), Weight of conjoint analysis trademark (a), weight of operating profit analysis trademark (b) and adjustment costs from the database ( Reading AC), inputting a duration (n), a tax and a discount rate (r) of the trademark, and performing computer programming using them to evaluate the value of the trademark; And (3) the preference and / or non-favorability of the trademark, based on the number of times of input of keywords in the consumer's positive and / or negative sense with respect to the trademark received or stored over the network during the evaluation of the security value of the trademark. Storing the database on the storage medium, and applying weights of the preferences and / or non-favorites to the collateral value of the trademarks obtained in the step (2) to apply weights related to consumer preferences, respectively. Features:

[Equation 1]

The preference of the trademark may be expressed as being proportional to the number of times of input of a keyword of a positive meaning of the keyword transmitted or stored through the communication network during the evaluation of the security value of the trademark.

The period for evaluating the security value can be any period, for example, it can be daily, weekly, monthly, three months, six months, one year or three years. The period of evaluating the collateral value is less than one day or more than three years may be undesirable because it is too short or too long in view of the evaluation of the collateral value, but the present invention is not limited thereto. Depending on the nature of the merchandise being sold, this may be an appropriate period. The period for evaluating the collateral value may preferably be one month, three months, six months or one year. For example, in the case of seasonal items such as clothing, the period for evaluating the collateral value may be appropriate for three months or one year.

The term "keyword in a positive sense" means the trademark itself and / or "good", "good", "haha", "I want to buy", "I want to wear", "I want to have", "cool", etc. Or it can be understood as meaning the vocabulary that can grasp the positive intention of the consumer with respect to the goods displayed thereon.

The unit input frequency of the keyword may be set in consideration of the frequency of use or the mode of use of the product represented by the trademark. For example, the unit input such as 1,000 times, 10,000 times, 100,000 times, 1,000,000 times, etc. The number of times can be set arbitrarily.

As used herein, the term "value in proportion to the number of unit inputs" may be understood to mean increasing the security value of the corresponding trademark right obtained in the step (2) in proportion to the number of unit inputs. For example, if the unit input frequency is set to 100,000 times, it is understood that the security value of the trademark rights obtained in the step (2) is increased by a certain amount every time a positive keyword is counted every 100,000 times. The range of increase may be, for example, increased by a selected increase in the range of 0 to 100%. For example, clothing may be set to increase by 0.1% in proportion to the number of inputs of 100,000 units.

The non-preference of the trademark may be expressed as a decrease in proportion to the number of unit inputs of a negative keyword of the consumer for the trademark received or transmitted through the communication network during the evaluation of the security value of the trademark.

As used herein, the term "negative keyword" means the opposite of the "positive keyword", for example, "bad", "bad", "unlike", "don't like to think", "wearing" It can be understood to mean vocabulary that can grasp the negative intention of the consumer with respect to the trademark itself and / or the commodity displayed thereon, such as "not like", "not like", "not cool", and the like.

Except for the term " negative keyword ", the definition can be the same as or similar to the definition of the preference of the trademark.

The term "reduction in proportion to the unit input frequency" may be understood to mean reducing the collateral value of the trademark rights obtained in the step (2) in proportion to the unit input frequency. For example, if the unit input frequency is set to 100,000 times, it may be understood that each time the negative keyword is counted every 100,000 times, the collateral value of the corresponding trademark right obtained in the step (2) is reduced by a certain amount. The reduction may be, for example, to be reduced to a selected reduction in the range of 0 to 100%. For example, it is possible to set the clothes to be reduced by 0.05% in proportion to the number of times of 100,000 inputs.

Due to the nature of trademark rights, it may be desirable to set the increase by the input of a positive keyword higher than the decrease by the input of a negative keyword for the same number of unit inputs. It is also possible to set For example, in the case of clothing, it is preferable to set the increase by input of a keyword having a positive meaning higher than the decrease by input of a keyword having a negative meaning. It may be desirable to set the reduction by the input of the keyword higher than the increase by the input of the keyword in a positive sense.

Otherwise, (3) accumulating the number of negative articles transmitted or stored through the communication network for a period of time from the evaluation point for evaluating the collateral value of the trademark right, and assigning a score in proportion to the cumulative number, and in proportion to the corresponding score. The collateral value of the trademarks obtained in step (2) can be reduced. At this time, the "schedule period" that accumulates the number of negative articles received or stored through the communication network may be, for example, one year or two years, preferably two years, but the present invention is not limited thereto. It can be understood that the appropriate time period can be targeted. In addition, the score allocation for the number of negative articles can be arbitrarily determined, for example, it can be assigned as shown in Table 1, but the present invention is not intended to be limited to this, other scores are assigned according to trademarks or products, etc. Can be understood.

In addition, a search target that accumulates the number of negative articles may be searched based on a known search site, for example, Kinds.or.kr, to accumulate the number of negative articles (number of complaint articles).

 The number of complaint articles for two years from the evaluation point score none 1.0 1 case 0.9 2 cases 0.8 3 Matches 0.7 4 Matches 0.6 5 or more 0.5

The conjoint analysis trademark value M _{conj .} May be a value calculated using Equation 2 below:

[Equation 2]

Conjoint Analysis Trademark Value = Marketing Trademark Operating Profit Value = Valuable Trademark Sales * Operating Profit Margin Before Adjustment * Adjusted Trademark Utility = Trademark Contribution

In Equation 2, the evaluation target trademark utility is a numerical value of the various attributes of the trademark right through the advice or interview of the expert group.

The operating profit analysis trademark value (FExcessreturn) may be a value calculated using Equation 3 below:

[Equation 3]

Operating Profit Analysis Trademark Value = Value that reflects AHP's share of trademark operating profit by marketing evaluation and trademark operating profit by financial evaluation

The joint analysis trademark weight and operating profit analysis trademark weight may be values calculated by an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) of trademark evaluation experts.

The adjustment cost may be the sum of the advertising costs and the trademark costs.

In particular, it may include storing the registration of the trademark rights, the duration of the registered trademark rights received from the database associated with the trademarks of the respective patent offices and treaties of Madrid through the communication network.

In order to calculate the trademark evaluation model according to the present invention required a basic basic model. This is an early model of trademark valuation, which is based on the conjoint analysis of future value of the trademark rights and the excess revenue operating method of the past value and uses an integrated approach using future and past value. It is represented by Equation 1 as a Trademark Rights Assessment Model (TAM).

In the early models, the marketing and financial approaches weighted by industry as an analytic hierachy process (AHP) were applied to the macroscopic (future and marketing) and microscopic approaches (past and financial) that are essential for collateral value. Enemy) are all considered.

Trademark rights security assessment of the present invention taking into account the trade mark rights value subtraction factor (TVSF), the deduction factor for measuring the conservative value of trademark rights in order to measure property rights as collateral in order to produce accurate results. Model).

The difference between TSAM and the early model (TAM) is that the trade mark rights value subtraction factor (TVSF), the deduction factor for measuring the conservative value of trademark rights, is measured to measure property rights as collateral.

To take a conservative view, the deduction index is used, and the deduction index consists of the proportion of trademarks held by the company, the main trademark verification coefficient, the future value verification coefficient, and the securitization verification coefficient.

The TSAM basic indicator summary table is shown in Table 2 below.

division Justice Remarks TV Trademark rights Value. Basic (total) value of trademark rights as exclusive property rights M conji Trademark Value through Marketing Analysis Homogeneous, in similar fields
Conjoint trademark value calculated through marketing research (four trademark studies including no brands) F excess return Trademark Value through Financial Analysis Through financial analysis in the same and similar fields
Excess revenue trademark value n Life of TR (trademark) = life expectancy x adjustment indicator How long can a trademark monetize e The earning rate, which means the rate of return. The indicator for yield is
Apply the operating margin of the year immediately before the trademark subject to evaluation r discount rate
= Cost of equity capital x ratio of capital +
Cost of Other Capital x (Expense of Other Capital) x (1-Corporate Tax Rate) Conversion rate to convert future cash flows to present value a Weight for Marketing Trademarks Weighting of the questionnaire of experts by AHP analysis b Weights for Financial Trademarks Weighting of the questionnaire of experts by AHP analysis AC Adjust Cost Cost to be added and deducted from the combined amount of marketing and financial trademarks tax Corporate tax rate Income tax rate corresponding to the tax base

The components of the TVSF are shown in Table 3 below.

Element Explanation Element Explanation TV
ratio The proportion of trademarks held by evaluation companies out of the trademark rights held by the company
Trademarks owned by companies and trademarks under evaluation should both be trademarks registered under the Trademark Law. - - MTR
adjust

평가대상 상표권이 기업이 주력 상표 (상표권 출원류 및 존속기간, 프로모션 활동)인가에 대하여 검증하여야 한다.* α ,β , r 은 전문위원의 설문을 통하여 AHP로 산정
* α +β + r = 1이다. Main Trademark right Verify adjust

Verify that the trademark under evaluation is the company's flagship trademark (application and duration of trademark rights, promotional activities). * Α, β, r are calculated by AHP through a questionnaire survey.
* alpha + beta + r = 1. W1 Indicator that verifies how important the trademark under evaluation is to the company For the formal indicator, the classification of trademark rights is used as an indicator, and as a practical indicator, the ratio of advertising expenses to the previous year's sales is used as an indicator. W2 Verification index for long-term holding of the trademark under evaluation in the enterprise
It is used as an indicator based on the data of the number of trademark registrations by the Korea Intellectual Property Office (1952-2012). W3 Indicators verifying more exposure to advertising agencies and advertising channels when the trademarks being evaluated are the main trademarks. Leverage qualitative indicators for, SNS, NMM FVV
adjust Future Value Verify adjust
In order to measure the future value of trademark rights, NPS, a measure of loyalty, and a non-loyal complaint index should be verified.

NPS
Positive Net Promoter Score Verification index that can recommend the trademark right to others
Except for non-brands in the field of similar oil derivatives, trademarks derived from evaluation and trademarks derived from the analysis of conjoints are used as indicators. NPS
Negative Net Promoter Score Negative also take advantage of the trademark during the trademark evaluate the degree does not recommend to anyone evaluation time period from the point in the past two years Kinds.or.kr negative articles TV
adjust Transfer Verify adjust
Verify that trademark rights are of value that can be transferred or liquidated

* The maximum price of quantitative indicators is 0.6 and the maximum price of qualitative indicators is 0.4.
Quantitative Index The collateral value of trademark rights is used as a quantitative verification index for whether it can be traded in heterogeneous and cooperative industries.
In the quantitative indicator, the sales growth rate of the three companies and the operating profit growth rate of the previous year were verified using the indicators excluding the non-brand. Qualitative indicators Qualitative indicators of whether the collateral value of trademark rights can be sold to heterogeneous and similar industries Qualitative indicators use the number of royalties in the same industry and the number of counterparts (preferably similar) as verification indicators.

1. Trademark Contribution Indicators:

The trademark rate ratio is the ratio of the trademark sales of the evaluation target among the company's registered trademarks.If the trademark right to be evaluated is consistent with the registered trademark of the corporation, the trademark ratio ratio is 1, which is the maximum price. In this case, the trademark ratio ratio is 0, which represents the lowest price.

Trademark rate ratio

* range

(Lowest price) 0-1 (highest price)

* meaning

Ratio of trademark sales of evaluation targets among those owned by registered companies (Equation 5)

[Equation 5]

* example

If there are 10 registered trademarks in the company, and if there are three registered trademarks to be evaluated, the index for this ratio is calculated as follows, and the priority is as follows.

* Indicators

1st: Use of trademark sales data

2nd priority: Calculation by residual method

Priority 3: Calculation by Alternative Cost Approach

Fourth priority: Calculation by trademark modality approach

2. Major Trademark Verification Index

The verification coefficients for a company's flagship trademark are largely classified into three categories: the main trademark verification index (W1), the long-term holding index (W2), and the advertisement exposure verification index (W3).

(1) Verification coefficient (MTRadjust) for the company's major trademarks-W1

The verification coefficient (W1) for a company's flagship trademarks is divided into formal indicators and substantial indicators. Formal indicators are explained in terms of the distribution of trademarks registered in the company, and the actual indicators use the ratio of advertising expenses to sales of the previous year as substitutes.

* range

(Lowest price) 0.12-1 (highest price)

* meaning

The trademark is a weight for the classification of categories according to the company's core business and degree of involvement and is an indicator of the company's main trademark.

* example

If the relevant trademark rights are trademark A, trademark B, or trademark C, the trademark A is in category 25, the trademark B is in category 9, and the trademark C is in category 41. The weight is given accordingly.

* Indicator 1 (Formal)

-Classification of the highest distribution among trademarks registered by the company with the highest level of involvement (core business) 1.0

-Classification of lanes or similar distribution among trademarks registered by the company with the second highest involvement level (similar core business) 0.6

-Classification of trademarks registered at the third-ranked company that has nothing to do with the company's core business (non-core business) 0.2

* Indicator 2 (substantial)

-Arrange the ratio of advertising cost to sales of the last year used in the conjoint analysis in descending order, and then use it as the weighting indicator below. However, four companies are included in the conjoint analysis, and none of these brands are excluded.

Company A (1st) / 1.0 Company B (2nd) / 0.8 Company C (3rd) 0.6

* Remarks

Indicators 1 and 2 are deducted on an equal scale. Indicator 1 deducted by -0.4, Indicator 2 deducted by -0.2

The weighting factor of W1 is calculated by multiplying index 1 and index 2.

For example, if Involvement 1 is selected and Firm B is selected, 1 = 0.8 = 0.8 is the weight.

(2) Verification coefficient (MTRadjust) of the company's main trademark W2

The long-term holding index (W2) uses the period in which a company registers a trademark right. The minimum price is 0.7 and the maximum price is 1.

* range

(Lowest price) 0.7-1 (highest price)

* meaning

It is used as an indicator of the company's main trademark as an indicator of long-term trademark rights in the enterprise.

* example

10 years for one extension of trademark

* Trademark Duration Indicator (W2)

Extension of 3 times of trademark rights: 1.0 points / Extension of 2 times of trademark rights: 0.9 points

One time extension of trademark rights: 0.8 points / [0104] One time use of trademark rights: 0.7 points

* Remarks

For more than 30 years, the brand is considered the company's top brand.

In the analysis of the duration of 1,229,639 trademarks registered with the Patent Office from 1952 to 2012, 48.98% stayed at once. Therefore, the index was calculated using the 0.1 equal scale starting from 0.7 based on the most common criterion.

(3) Verification coefficient (MTRadjust) of the company's major trademarks W3

Advertising exposure verification indicators (W3) are divided into objective indicators and qualitative indicators. Objective indicators indicate the exposure of relevant trademark advertisements to TV, newspapers, radio, and the Internet within two years from the time of evaluation. Qualitative indicators refer to professional magazines, free papers, local press, SNS, and NMM that are not included in the quantification index. Evaluation index for expert members.

* range

(Lowest price) 0-1 (highest price)

* meaning

The advertising period and advertising channel are used as indicators of the company's main trademark.

In other words, if the trademark to be evaluated is the company's flagship trademark, various advertising channels will be used for a certain period of time.

* example

Number of channels: Leverage rating tables from TV, newspapers, radio, and the Internet

Advertising period: only within 2 years from evaluation

* Indicators

Number of Channels: This will be reflected when the company assessing trademark rights provides evidence of the highest score among the four channels.

(Use only one of the highest rated channels out of four)

(Maximum objective data score 0.6 + Expert opinion score 0.4)

Expert Opinion: We present the weight ratio for the number of channels to experts, reflecting a maximum of 0.4 for professional magazines, free papers, local media, SNS, and NMM that are not included in the quantification indicators.

* Remarks

Provide guidance to experts on advertising channels for competitors.

Even if 0 points are obtained due to lack of objective data, an average price can be obtained because a maximum of 0.4 points can be obtained by expert opinion.

3. Future Value Index

Future value indicators are divided into incentives for purchase recommendation and inability to recommend others.

(1) FVVadjust for trademark rights: NPS-positive ratio of purchase recommendation ratio: 0.8

Incentive to buy is an indicator that can recommend the trademark to others.

* range

(Lowest price) 0-1 (highest price)

* meaning

Trademarks that can recommend the trademark to others reach loyalty (brand outcome variable) through recognition, goodwill, reliability, and satisfaction (brand formation variables).

Therefore, in the conjoint survey, the recognition, attractiveness, reliability, and satisfaction of brand formation are all reflected, so the marketing approach only reflects NPS, which is an indicator of loyalty.

* example

If the trademark is trademark A, trademark B, or trademark C, the trademarks competing with each other for the common trademarks for each trademark are examined simultaneously.

The brand-free NPS is also surveyed and surveyed at the same time for conjoint surveys.

* Indicators

Highest NPS of competing brands = A: weight 1

Lowest NPS of competing brands = B: weighted 0

NPS = C between the highest and lowest NPS among competing brands

= A> 0, B> 0: [(A-B)-C] / (A-B)

= A> 0, B <0, C> 0: [(A-B)-C] / (A-B)

= A> 0, B <0, C <0: [| B | -| C |)] / (A-B)

= A <0, B <0, C <0: [| B | -| C |)] / [| B-A |]

* Remarks

Note: The research papers that the V-5 NPS is a valid indicator of loyalty include Hye-Jung Hwang, Jung-Hwan Choi (2007), East et al. (2011), Keiningham et al. (2007), and Reichheld (2003).

(2) FVVadjust for trademark rights: NPS-Positive share of complaints: 0.2

The complaint intention coefficient is an index that does not recommend the trademark right to others, and is a substitute for this, which is the cumulative number of negative articles (number of complaints) from Kinds.or.kr for two years from the time of evaluation. It was. The scores are as follows:

-Number of complaint articles for two years from the evaluation point: Score

None: 1.0

1 case: 0.9

2 cases: 0.8

3 cases: 0.7

4 cases: 0.6

5 or more: 0.5

4. Securitization Index

(1) Correlated trademark securitization verification coefficient (TVadjust)

The trademark securitization verification coefficients are divided into quantitative indicators and qualitative indicators.The quantitative indicators are objective indicators of the extent to which the trademarks can be securitized in both homogeneous and heterogeneous industries, based on sales growth rate and operating profit growth rate. It is scored by presenting to the expert committee the number of desirable pairs.

* range

(Lowest price) 0-1 (highest price)

* meaning

Securitization is the possibility of selling trademark collateral to heterogeneous or similar industries

* example

In order to trade the trademark right, marketability must be high. Indicators of marketability include sales growth, operating profit growth, royalties, and the number of competitors involved.

Therefore, we use sales growth and operating profit growth as indicators.

[Quantity Indicators]

Industry and heterogeneous sectors: Average of 3 companies (up to 0.6) except for non-brands that can use the trademark rights

Last Year's Sales Growth> 0, Last Year's Operating Profit Growth> 0: 0.6

Last Year's Sales Growth> 0, Last Year's Operating Profit Growth <0: 0.4

Last Year's Sales Growth <0, Last Year's Operating Profit Growth> 0: 0.4

Last Year's Sales Growth <0, Last Year's Operating Profit Growth <0: 0.2

[Quality Indicator]

If you have more than one royalty, + Expert opinion: 0.2

(Capacity of Heterogeneous Licenses)

If there is a corner (preferably 3 or more) or more + Expert opinion: 0.2

If there is a corner (preferably one or more) or more + Expert opinion: 0.1

(Maximum Score for Expert Opinion)

If no corner is found: 0 points

Index Verification: The minimum price of financial index is 0.2, plus the maximum opinion point of 0.4 is equal to the maximum price of financial index.

* Remarks

One royalty and one positive counter would be a requirement.

Copies of reference material of similar company: Joint investigation by IPC and IP Office: Trademarks operated by the Special Judicial Police Force (http://blog.naver.com/kipracafe)

5. Variable Selection

5.1. Trademark Duration

The duration of a trademark is difficult to calculate the actual duration of a trademark because of the 10-year duration for that trademark. Therefore, the data classified by industry classification code will be utilized by utilizing the data of each industry on the establishment and closure of the company by the National Statistical Office.

In addition, data on the introduction, maturity, growth, and decline of trademark rights are not available at home and abroad. After selecting the indicators of the company's life cycle, the duration of the trademark right was calculated by giving points to the experts.

Trademark Duration-n

* range

(Lowest price) 0-36.83 (highest price)

* meaning

How long can a trademark monetize

* Indicator 1

The duration of the 19 sectors suggested by the National Statistical Office is used as an indicator.

* Indicator 2

Through the average annual growth rate of sales of conjoint companies (3 companies average CAGR) excluding brands, the trademark life cycles are classified as follows, and the expert commissioner separately assesses trademark life cycles for each life cycle (introduction, growth period). Qualitative scores (0.1-1.0) for maturity, maturity, and decline.

Introductory period (0 -10% or less) / Growth (more than 25%) / Maturity (10% -25%) / Decline (less than 0%) The introduction period, growth period, maturity period and decline by industry are calculated in conjunction with the duration of trademark rights.

* Duration

In Indicator 1 for manufacturing and retail sectors, if the life cycle of the firm is mature and the panel score is 0.5 in Indicator 2 in 8.6

=> Indicator 1 X Indicator 2 = 8.6 years X 0.5 = 4.3 years

* Remarks

There is no relevant paper on the life cycle of trademark rights, so the company life cycle paper is used as a substitute.

See Peter N. Golder and Gerard J. Tellis (2004) of Reference V-6.

The maximum price of 36.83 is assumed for the case of public administration and with a commissioner score of 1.0.

The measurement of trademark life span, which has been reviewed so far, is more objective and reliable than the evaluation by the big data survival curve mentioned below rather than the evaluation by existing experts or professional organizations.

5.2. discount rate

The discount rate is used interchangeably with the capitalization rate that converts future cash flows to present value.

Discount rate-r

* meaning

The reduction rate, which is used to convert future cash flows to present values, as a weighted average cost of capital (WACC).

* WACC

= Cost of equity capital x ratio of equity capital + cost of debt capital x ratio of debt capital x (1-corporate tax rate)

* Cost of equity

Based on the three-year Treasury yield of the Financial Investment Association.

If there is a credit rating: 3-year maturity

If there is no credit rating: Estimate the return rate and apply the surplus rate by calculating the surrogate companies with similar financial leverage and operating leverage and the corporate bond credit rating.

* Cost of debt

In calculating the cost of debt, corporate tax shall be based on the tax base (Table 4: Corporate tax rate effective on January 1, 2013, corporate tax revision on December 31, 2011).

Tax standard tariff 200 million won or less 10% of tax base More than 200 million won ~ less than 20 billion won 20% (20% of the amount exceeding 20 million won + 200 million won) Over 20 billion won 22% (22% of the amount exceeding KRW 390 billion + 20 billion won)

* Remarks

If there is no credit rating in the cost of equity capital, it is calculated by considering the average 52-week beta price and risk premium of similar companies.

Hereinafter, the application of the trademark evaluation model (TSAM) according to the present invention will be described.

1. Basic assumptions about valuation of trademark collateral

The basic assumptions for the evaluation of the security value of a trademark are as follows.

-This assessment uses Code of Integration Approach to estimate the trademark evaluation of Codez Combine.

The Integration Approach evaluated the marketing and financial approaches.

The marketing approach included expert interviews, in-depth interviews with consumers, and one-on-one interviews with consumers.

The marketing approach examined four trademarks, including no brands.

-No brand was selected as spicy color for the brand name, and the selection criteria were applied for the trademark and the company was able to obtain the lowest and financial statements in the apparel category of Ranky.com.

Codes of Combine is assumed to be invalid.

-Duration was taken into account for the three-year average annual growth rate of sales of three companies excluding Statistics Korea, qualitative indicators of experts, and no brands.

As the capitalization rate (WACC) is currently credited with Codez Combine, a non-guaranteed corporate bond rate is used as the risk premium for capital in the cost of equity capital.

-The rate of return is based on the operating margin of the year immediately before the trademark under evaluation.

-The marketing and financial value of trademark rights were calculated by AHP through a questionnaire survey.

Costs and costs discernible from trademark adjustment costs are limited to advertising and trademark costs.

-The information on the relevant advertising channels in W3 in the trademark main verification factor was not reflected in Codez Combine because it could not be reflected (Table 5: Codes Combine Evaluation Period and Process).

2. Evaluation of Trademark Collateral Value

2.1. Trademark Value Metrics

In order to conduct the conjoint analysis, six consumer in-depth interviews were conducted to derive the attributes and levels, and one from Busan, five from Seoul and the Gyeonggi area. The results and the results of interviews from October 31, 2013 to November 2, 2013 are summarized in Table 6 (attributes and levels derived through in-depth interviews).

property level price 100,000 won or less / 100,000 won ~ 200,000 won / 200,000 won ~ 300,000 won / 300,000 won or more style Color / Trend / Fit / Design quality Durability / Weight / Functionality / Material brand Codes Combine / Forever 21 / Grow / Spicy Collar

(1) In-depth interview (6 persons) to derive marketing trademark attribute and level (~ 11.2)

① Office worker (age 29) working as a travel agency-Busan University

* Comparison brands when purchasing Codes Combine

Zara, Forever21, H & M, UNIQLO

* Priority for product purchase

Design, price, pit, weight, colors, fashion, quality, sewing, brand, advertising

* Property and level classification

Before Wearing: Color, Quality, Appearance, DP

After Wear: Fit, Sewing, Weight

② College Students (23)-Hongdae

* Comparison brands when purchasing Codes Combine

Growing up, Giordano, Forever21

* Priority for product purchase

Trend, price, DP, light material, fair design, harmonious, size free, not long fit, high-quality hat hair, brand

* Property and level classification

Design: Trend, Material, Size, Luxury, Collar, DP Brand, Price, Care and Wash

③ College Student (20)-Hongdae

* Comparison brands when purchasing Codes Combine

Mango, grow up, forever21

* Priority for product purchase

Rareness, Celebrity Trends, Simple, Collar, Skinless, Endothelial, Fit, Material, DP, Advertising

* Property and level classification

Design: scarcity, simple, color, fit

Function: PUR, endothelial detachment, material

Recognition: Trends, DP, Advertising

④ Housewife (33)-Apgujeong

* Comparison brands when purchasing Codes Combine

UNIQLO, GAP, Mango, Grow Up, Forever21 Internet Blog Post, Magazine, Display,

* Priority for product purchase

Warm autumn, design (fit, material, high quality, color of the hair), price, trend, brand

* Property and level classification

Marketing: Internet blogs, postings, magazines, DP, warmth products. Design (fit, material, fur, collar)

Price: Brand Trends

⑤ Office Worker (25)-Hongdae

* Comparison brands when purchasing Codes Combine

Zara, UNIQLO, Eight seconds

* Priority for product purchase

Blog posts, magazines, display, warmth, design, price, trends, brands

* Property and level classification

Design: Collar, DP, Fit, Trend

Quality: texture, fit

⑥ University Student (22)-Myeongdong

* Comparison brands when purchasing Codes Combine

Grow up, UNIQLO, Giordano

* Priority for product purchase

Price, color, weight, design, brand, material, advertising model

* Property and level classification

Design: color, style, conclusion

Material: fit, weight, care and washing

(2) Deriving attributes and levels through in-depth interview data (~ 11.05)

(Example: Codes Combine Night Jumper)

① price

100,000 won or less / 100,000 won ~ 200,000 won / 200,000 won ~ 300,000 won / 300,000 won or more

② style

Color / Trend / Fit / Design

③ quality

Durability / Weight / Functionality / Material

④ brand

Codes Combine / Forever 21 / Zara / Spicy Color

(3) Sample marketing trademark 1: 1 interview (50 people) (~ 11.13)

After the statistics on the priorities are returned through the attributes and levels derived from Table 6, they are divided into current and prospective clients using the stratified sampling method (AHP) in Table 7 (1: 1 Interview Results Table), and then by region and age. In addition, 1: 1 interviews were conducted by job class.

division By region / age 19-24 years 25-29 years 30-34 years 35-39 years old sub Total Codes Combine
Purchased Women
(Current customer) Gangnam (Munjeong Branch) 3 3 3 3 12 Gangbuk (Myeongdong Branch) 3 3 2 2 10 Busan (Busan University Branch) One One One One 4 sub Total 7 7 6 6 26 Codes Combine
I-shopping customer
(Future audience) Gangnam (Munjeong Branch) 3 3 3 3 12 Gangbuk (Myeongdong Branch) 2 2 2 2 8 Busan (Busan University Branch) One One One One 4 sub Total 6 6 6 6 24 sum 13 13 12 12 50 division By occupation / age 19-24 years 25-29 years 30-34 years 35-39 years old sub Total Codes Combine
Purchased Women
(Current customer) White collar 0 3 2 2 7 housewife 0 3 4 4 11 College student 7 One 0 0 8 sub Total 7 7 6 6 26 Codes Combine
I-shopping customer
(Future audience) White collar 0 3 2 2 7 housewife 0 2 4 4 10 College student 6 One 0 0 7 sub Total 6 6 6 6 24 sum 13 13 12 12 50

(4) Estimation of marketing trademark value (M _{conji .} )

Table 8 below is a utility value results table for attributes and levels.

Attribute utility level Level individual utility Remarks brand
(37.69) Codes Combine 9.72 37.69X (1.0435 + 0.0326) / (1.0435 + 0.5543)] / 2.612 Spicy Collar 0.0 Goto sleep 14.43 Pearson's r 0.974 Significance 0 Forever21 13.54 price
(16.41) 100,000 won or less 7.5 Kendall's tau 0.795 Significance 0 100,000 won-200,000 won 0.0 200,000 won-300,000 won 3.63

More than 300,000 won 5.27 style
(14.11) design 4.52 trend 4.97 color 4.61 Fit 0.00 quality
(31.79) Material 11.80 weight 0.00 Functional 11.80 durability 8.19

Sales on December 31, 2012 = (189,107,083,441) X 0.0972 [0315] = 18,375,726,811

(189,107,083,441: Revenue recognized in K-IFRS as revenue in comprehensive income statement)

Table 8 shows a result table for the attributes and the individual utility levels. In particular, since Pearson's R and Kendall's tau are significant and convincing in the price of the questionnaire, they are used as utility prices. The company's conjoint brand value is calculated as of Dec. 31, 2012, at W18,375,726,811, multiplied by 9.72% of the utility price of Codez Combine at W189,107,083,441 on December 31, 2012.

(5) TR ratio

The weighting indicators for the evaluation of trademark rights are shown in Table 9 (unit: million won,%).

Business subject take importance Fashion part codes combine for women / men 75,988 40.30% basic + by codes combine 34,201 18.10% codes combine innerwear 39,749 21.10% codes combine jeans 10,037 5.30% C_CoDE 5,442 2.90% accessory 10,802 5.70% Hiker 5,136 2.70% kids 6,566 3.50% New York 627 0.30% Sum 188,548 100.00%

The data in Table 9 cited data from the Kodez Combine audit report of the Electronic Disclosure System, and the sales revenue was from the comprehensive income statement recognized in the corporate accounting standards. Currently, the ratio of sales due to trademarks similar to Codez Combine is 99.7%. to be. That is, (188,548,000,000 / 189,107,083,441) x 100 = 99.7%.

(6) Main trademark evaluation verification index: MTR adjust (formal indicator 1 in W1)

As a result of analyzing 85 brands registered in Codez Combine, Codex Combine and similar trademarks were analyzed as a total of 60 trademarks (as of December 31, 2012, Table 10 (See Codes Combine similar trademark classification))

Codes Combine Similar Trademarks 1st & codes combine Jeans codes combine C_CoDE codes combine kids codes codes combine hiker codes combine NEWYORK codes combine codes combine HOMME CODES NEWYORK codes combine accessory codes combine Jeans combine codes combine basic + codes combine Junior Codes Combine

These 60 trademarks ranged from 3rd to 43rd class, of which 25 were the most registered as 16 (see Table 11 (Table of Trademarks by Trademark Classification)).

Third class Class 9 14th 16th class Class 18 Class 23 24 class Class 25 Class 26 Class 27 Class 28 Class 35 Class 41 Class 43 4 6 5 One 12 One One 16 12 One One 12 One One 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 0.25 0.375 0.3125 0.0625 0.75 0.0625 0.0625 16 0.75 0.0625 0.0625 0.75 0.0625 0.0625

The 25 most common are 16, and the 25 are the trademarks belonging to the core industries of clothing, shoes and hats. Therefore, the price of formal indicator 1 of W1 becomes 1.

(7) Main trademark evaluation verification index: MTR adjust (actual index 2 in W1)

MTR Adjust uses W1 as a percentage of revenue from three competitors, excluding brands. Here, Codes Combine was the highest with 1.33%, which scored 1 point (see Table 12 (Codes Combined Verification Index Evaluation Code)).

Trade name take Advertising expenses Of sales
Advertising ratio score Remarks Codes Combine 189,107,083,441 2,523,376,382 1.33% 1.0 Goto sleep 203,875,090,000 111,472,000 0.05% 0.6 Forever21 39,828,283,000 260,208,000 0.65% 0.8 Spicy Collar 12,967,534,000 400,056,000 3.09% Brand

Standard of No Brand: Company within 2 years of registered trademark and posted financial statement as the lowest rank in the comparative industry on Ranki.com

However, if there is a lack of validity in the Ranki.com data or if there is no small category data for the industry, the Brand Committee or Brand Evaluation Committee will decide.

For example, UNIQLO belonged to FRL Korea and was excluded from marketing research because it was difficult to obtain financial statements because it had never been loaned in Korea.

W1 = Formal Indicator 1 X Actual Indicator 2 = 1 X 1 = 1

(8) Main trademark evaluation verification index: MTR adjust (W2)

Based on Codes Combine, filed on January 21, 2010 and registered on June 9, 2011. Previously, Codez Combine was not registered.

Therefore, since the trademark right is currently used once, the score corresponds to 0.7.

W2 = 0.7

Score according to trademark duration

* 3 or more extension marks: 1.0 points

* Trademark extension point: 0.9 points

* Trademark one-time extension points: 0.8 points

* Score once using trademark rights: 0.7 points

(9) Main trademark evaluation verification index: MTR adjust (W3)

① objective indicator

Codez Combine has been running advertisements once a half a year for 2012 during the year, and the code name and amount of the media cannot be disclosed. In addition, the data published in the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Policy Research (12-Jung-042) were reconstructed and used.

② qualitative indicator

The subjective score ranges from 0 to 4 points. The average score of 11 experts was 0.1727. The subjective scores here take into account the various activities of Codez Combine for professional magazines, free newspapers, local media, SNS, and NMM.

In the case of Codez Combine, we conducted one semi-annual semiannual quarter, one quarterly magazine advertisement, and six fashion magazine advertisements in 2012.

③ MTR adjust

Objective Indicators (0) + Qualitative Indicators (0.1727)

Table 13 below shows the MTR adjust analysis table for Codez Combine.

division Contents Individual score Remarks score AHP weight Flagship
Verification Index W1 1.1. Formal indicator One 1.1 X 1.2 One 41.29% 41.29% 1.2. A substantial indicator One W2 2.1 Duration of Trademark Rights 0.7 0.7 33.94% 23.76% W3 3.1 Objective Indicators 0. 3.1 + 3.2 0.1727 24.76% 4.27% 3.2 subjective indicators 0.1727 Major Trademark Verification Index 69.33%

Looking at the MTR adjust analysis table for the Codes Combine of Table 13 as follows.

In W1, the scores of the formal indicators and the actual indicators were each 1 point, which is multiplied by one. The score of W2 is 0.7, and 0 and 0.1727 of the objective and subjective indicators of W3 are 0.1727. As a result of calculating the AHP weights by questioning the weights of W1, W2, and W3 to experts, 41.29%, 33.94%, and 24.76% were calculated. Is derived.

(10) Future Value Verification Index: FVV adjust

In Table 14 (FVV Adjust Analysis Table for Codes Combine), the Code of Reference for Codez Combine, Zara, Forever 21, and Spicy Color was calculated from a survey conducted in a 1: 1 interview, and among them, Codes Combine NPS of was high as 0.02. This is because the survey was conducted in front of the Codes Combine store. However, despite the high NPS of Coeds Combine, the brand utility of Coeds Combine (9.72%) was lower than that of Grow (14.43%) and Forever 21 (13.54%).

Terms Brand name NPS Remarks score Calculation / Basis Positive
NPS Codes Combine 0.02 (8-7) / 50 One On a ten-point scale
9-10 points: Active referrals
7-8 points: neutral customer
1-6 points: Non-recommended customers
NPS =
(Active referrals-deprecated customers) /
Total respondents Goto sleep -0.18 (7-16) / 50 0.7767 Forever21 -0.38 (5-24) / 50 0.5064 Spicy Collar -0.74 (2-39) / 50 0 Negative
NPS Search negative articles on Kinds.or.kr for two years from the time of rating 0.7 The number of complaint articles for two years from the evaluation point score none 1.0 1 case 0.9 2 cases 0.8 3 Matches 0.7 4 Matches 0.6 5 or more 0.5 Securitization Value Verification Index (FVV adjust) 94% 1 X 0.8 + 0.7 X 0.2

(11) Liquidation verification index: TV adjust

In the securitization index on Codez Combine, the quantitative indicators are the average sales growth rate and operating profit growth rate of three companies excluding brands. The price corresponds to 0.4 points, as sales growth is positive and operating profit is negative.

In the securitization verification index for Codez Combine, the qualitative index is 0.2 points for one or more royalties, 0.1 points for one preferred corner and 0.2 points for three preferred corners. I put it. In the case of Codez Combine, there was not one desirable pair, so it was excluded from the score. The number of royalties was 3, which resulted in a questionnaire survey of experts. Table 15 shows the TV Adjust analysis for Codez Combine.

division Trade name Sales growth rate Operating profit growth rate Remarks dose
Indicators Codes Combine -6.86% -165.12% Maximum Score: 0.6
Previous year's sales growth rate> 0,
Last year's operating profit growth rate <0
: 0.4 Goto sleep 21.84% 151.38% Forever21 0.60% -155.77% 3 companies average 5.19% -56.50% score + - 0.4 Qualitative Indicator Evaluation Basic Requirements score Remarks Qualitative
Indicators If you have more than one royalty 0.0909 Currently, the apparel industry is trading three or more royalties, including Seokwang's Darklace, Taewon's FRJ, and Samsung C &T's countdown.
Maximum score: 0.2
Average score of 11 experts If the number of pairs (preferably) is 3 or more None Maximum score: 0.2 If the number of pairs (preferably) is 1 or more None Maximum score: 0.1 Future Value Verification Index 49.09% + 0.0909

(12) Global Trademark Addition Index: GLO adjust (TVAF) (Based on December 31)

The results of the Madrid search for Codez Combine are shown in FIG. 2.

Table 16 shows the GLO Adjust analysis for Codez Combine.

Trade name Brand Name Number Applicable Total score Rationale Remarks codes combine One Class 25 Individual score 0.5 0.5 0.25 0.5X0.5 0.25-0.4
=> 1 / 1,000

As a result of code search results in Madrid, one class was registered in the 25th class, so that each product registration and the number of registrations per class were obtained 0.5 points each, which is 0.25 and multiplied by 0.25. According to 5, 1 / 1,000 is substituted.

(13) Duration

ranking Classification New start-up rate Average age OP margin Former industry 14.3% 8 years April 8.3% One Sports and Entertainment Services 23.1% 4 years January 13.1% 2 Restaurants and taverns 21.1% 5 years January 23.0% 3 Education service industry 16.8% 8 years August 5.5% 4 Business support service 16.6% 7 years 0 4.8% 5 Real estate 15.9% 6 years November 8.1% 6 Land transportation and pipeline transportation 15.8% 9 years 12.5% 7 Retail business; Except car 14.8% 8 years May 10.2% 8 Social welfare service industry 14.7% 6 years November 9.9% 9 Other personal service 14.3% 8 years 28.8% 10 Professional Service 11.3% 8 years October 8.3% 11 Professional Work 10.3% February 8 5.3% 12 Wholesale and commodity brokerage 10.1% 8 years October 5.3% 13 Accommodation 9.2% 8 years 18.1% 14 Repair 9.2% 9 years 15.1% 15 Health care 8.7% April 10 17.2%

Table 17 above is taken from the 2010 statistics.

The duration calculation method is as follows:

The calculation of duration is applied based on the average duration of the standard industrial classification criteria table of the National Statistical Office. For example, the body friend is December 31, 2014, so the National Statistical Office will apply for 8 years and 10 months. In addition, the survival curve is applied when 8 years and 10 months have been added since the establishment date, and if the Hazard Model is used, the probability of default is 15.53%. The total useful life is 16.66 years from the date of establishment. This is 16.66 / (1 + 0.1533) = 14.42 years.

Applying this to wava:

In the case of wava, when the survival curve is applied, the actual duration is December 31, 2016, and the company rehabilitation procedure began on April 11, 2016, and the rehabilitation date is December 23, 2016. It has objective data to predict survival.

The following shows monthly probability of default using survival curve. Table 19 below is a conversion table (unit:%, year) considering the default risk by period (1 year-12 years); Table 20 is a conversion table (unit:%, year) taking into account default risks by period (13-24 years); Table 21 is a translation table (unit:%, year) taking into account default risks by period (25-36 years).

Neutral survival Default risk Conservative survival ¹⁾ Neutral survival Default risk Conservative survival Neutral survival Default risk Survival Period Neutral survival Default risk Conservative survival 1.00 0.09 0.91 4.00 0.10 3.59 7.00 0.11 6.20 10.00 0.13 8.74 1.08 0.09 0.98 4.08 0.10 3.66 7.08 0.11 6.28 10.08 0.13 8.81 1.17 0.09 1.06 4.17 0.10 3.74 7.17 0.11 6.35 10.17 0.13 8.88 1.25 0.09 1.13 4.25 0.10 3.81 7.25 0.11 6.42 10.25 0.13 8.95 1.33 0.09 1.21 4.33 0.10 3.88 7.33 0.11 6.49 10.33 0.13 9.02 1.42 0.10 1.28 4.42 0.10 3.96 7.42 0.12 6.56 10.42 0.13 9.09 1.50 0.10 1.36 4.50 0.10 4.03 7.50 0.12 6.63 10.50 0.13 9.16 1.58 0.10 1.43 4.58 0.10 4.10 7.58 0.12 6.70 10.58 0.13 9.22 1.67 0.10 1.51 4.67 0.11 4.18 7.67 0.12 6.78 10.67 0.13 9.29 1.75 0.10 1.58 4.75 0.11 4.25 7.75 0.12 6.85 10.75 0.13 9.36 1.83 0.10 1.66 4.83 0.11 4.32 7.83 0.12 6.92 10.83 0.13 9.43 1.92 0.10 1.73 4.92 0.11 4.40 7.92 0.12 6.99 10.92 0.13 9.50 2.00 0.10 1.81 5.00 0.11 4.47 8.00 0.12 7.06 11.00 0.13 9.57 2.08 0.10 1.88 5.08 0.11 4.54 8.08 0.12 7.13 11.08 0.13 9.64 2.17 0.10 1.96 5.17 0.11 4.61 8.17 0.12 7.20 11.17 0.13 9.70 2.25 0.10 2.03 5.25 0.11 4.69 8.25 0.12 7.27 11.25 0.13 9.77 2.33 0.10 2.10 5.33 0.11 4.76 8.33 0.12 7.34 11.33 0.13 9.84 2.42 0.10 2.18 5.42 0.11 4.83 8.42 0.12 7.41 11.42 0.13 9.91 2.50 0.10 2.25 5.50 0.11 4.91 8.50 0.12 7.48 11.50 0.13 9.98 2.58 0.10 2.33 5.58 0.11 4.98 8.58 0.12 7.55 11.58 0.13 10.04 2.67 0.10 2.40 5.67 0.11 5.05 8.67 0.12 7.63 11.67 0.13 10.11 2.75 0.10 2.48 5.75 0.11 5.12 8.75 0.12 7.70 11.75 0.13 10.18 2.83 0.10 2.55 5.83 0.11 5.20 8.83 0.12 7.77 11.83 0.13 10.25 2.92 0.10 2.63 5.92 0.11 5.27 8.92 0.12 7.84 11.92 0.13 10.31 3.00 0.10 2.70 6.00 0.11 5.34 9.00 0.12 7.91 12.00 0.13 10.38 3.08 0.10 2.77 6.08 0.11 5.41 9.08 0.12 7.98 12.08 0.14 10.45 3.17 0.10 2.85 6.17 0.11 5.49 9.17 0.12 8.05 12.17 0.14 10.52 3.25 0.10 2.92 6.25 0.11 5.56 9.25 0.12 8.12 12.25 0.14 10.58 3.33 0.10 3.00 6.33 0.11 5.63 9.33 0.12 8.19 12.33 0.14 10.65 3.42 0.10 3.07 6.42 0.11 5.70 9.42 0.12 8.26 12.42 0.14 10.72 3.50 0.10 3.14 6.50 0.11 5.77 9.50 0.12 8.33 12.50 0.14 10.79 3.58 0.10 3.22 6.58 0.11 5.85 9.58 0.12 8.39 12.58 0.14 10.85 3.67 0.10 3.29 6.67 0.11 5.92 9.67 0.12 8.46 12.67 0.14 10.92 3.75 0.10 3.37 6.75 0.11 5.99 9.75 0.12 8.53 12.75 0.14 10.99 3.83 0.10 3.44 6.83 0.11 6.06 9.83 0.13 8.60 12.83 0.14 11.05 3.92 0.10 3.51 6.92 0.11 6.13 9.92 0.13 8.67 12.92 0.14 11.12

In the table, 1) mean survival time = neutral survival time X (1- default risk). Also, 1.08 means 1 year and 1 month and 1.17 means 1 year and 2 months.

The default risk for each period is from 1 year to 36 years, and if it is more than 36 years from the date of establishment, the default risk corresponding to November 36 is applied. For example, for 38 years from the date of incorporation, the default risk of 0.04 for November 2007 (36.92 years) applies.

Neutral survival Default risk Conservative survival Neutral survival Default risk Conservative survival Neutral survival Default risk Survival Period Neutral survival Default risk Conservative survival 13.00 0.14 11.19 16.00 0.15 13.56 19.00 0.16 15.95 22.00 0.15 18.71 13.08 0.14 11.25 16.08 0.15 13.62 19.08 0.16 16.02 22.08 0.15 18.80 13.17 0.14 11.32 16.17 0.15 13.69 19.17 0.16 16.09 22.17 0.15 18.89 13.25 0.14 11.39 16.25 0.15 13.75 19.25 0.16 16.16 22.25 0.15 18.98 13.33 0.14 11.45 16.33 0.15 13.82 19.33 0.16 16.23 22.33 0.15 19.07 13.42 0.14 11.52 16.42 0.15 13.88 19.42 0.16 16.30 22.42 0.15 19.16 13.50 0.14 11.59 16.50 0.15 13.95 19.50 0.16 16.37 22.50 0.14 19.25 13.58 0.14 11.65 16.58 0.15 14.01 19.58 0.16 16.44 22.58 0.14 19.35 13.67 0.14 11.72 16.67 0.16 14.08 19.67 0.16 16.51 22.67 0.14 19.44 13.75 0.14 11.79 16.75 0.16 14.14 19.75 0.16 16.59 22.75 0.14 19.54 13.83 0.14 11.85 16.83 0.16 14.21 19.83 0.16 16.66 22.83 0.14 19.63 13.92 0.14 11.92 16.92 0.16 14.28 19.92 0.16 16.73 22.92 0.14 19.73 14.00 0.14 11.98 17.00 0.16 14.34 20.00 0.16 16.80 23.00 0.14 19.83 14.08 0.14 12.05 17.08 0.16 14.41 20.08 0.16 16.88 23.08 0.14 19.92 14.17 0.14 12.12 17.17 0.16 14.47 20.17 0.16 16.95 23.17 0.14 20.02 14.25 0.15 12.18 17.25 0.16 14.54 20.25 0.16 17.03 23.25 0.13 20.12 14.33 0.15 12.25 17.33 0.16 14.60 20.33 0.16 17.10 23.33 0.13 20.23 14.42 0.15 12.31 17.42 0.16 14.67 20.42 0.16 17.18 23.42 0.13 20.33 14.50 0.15 12.38 17.50 0.16 14.74 20.50 0.16 17.25 23.50 0.13 20.43 14.58 0.15 12.44 17.58 0.16 14.80 20.58 0.16 17.33 23.58 0.13 20.53 14.67 0.15 12.51 17.67 0.16 14.87 20.67 0.16 17.40 23.67 0.13 20.64 14.75 0.15 12.58 17.75 0.16 14.94 20.75 0.16 17.48 23.75 0.13 20.75 14.83 0.15 12.64 17.83 0.16 15.00 20.83 0.16 17.56 23.83 0.13 20.85 14.92 0.15 12.71 17.92 0.16 15.07 20.92 0.16 17.64 23.92 0.12 20.96 15.00 0.15 12.77 18.00 0.16 15.14 21.00 0.16 17.72 24.00 0.12 21.07 15.08 0.15 12.84 18.08 0.16 15.20 21.08 0.16 17.80 24.08 0.12 21.18 15.17 0.15 12.90 18.17 0.16 15.27 21.17 0.16 17.88 24.17 0.12 21.29 15.25 0.15 12.97 18.25 0.16 15.34 21.25 0.15 17.96 24.25 0.12 21.41 15.33 0.15 13.03 18.33 0.16 15.40 21.33 0.15 18.04 24.33 0.12 21.52 15.42 0.15 13.10 18.42 0.16 15.47 21.42 0.15 18.12 24.42 0.11 21.63 15.50 0.15 13.16 18.50 0.16 15.54 21.50 0.15 18.20 24.50 0.11 21.75 15.58 0.15 13.23 18.58 0.16 15.61 21.58 0.15 18.29 24.58 0.11 21.86 15.67 0.15 13.29 18.67 0.16 15.68 21.67 0.15 18.37 24.67 0.11 21.98 15.75 0.15 13.36 18.75 0.16 15.74 21.75 0.15 18.46 24.75 0.11 22.10 15.83 0.15 13.43 18.83 0.16 15.81 21.83 0.15 18.54 24.83 0.11 22.22 15.92 0.15 13.49 18.92 0.16 15.88 21.92 0.15 18.63 24.92 0.10 22.34

Neutral survival Default risk Conservative survival Neutral survival Default risk Conservative survival Neutral survival Default risk Survival Period Neutral survival Default risk Conservative survival 25.00 0.10 22.46 28.00 0.03 27.18 31.00 -0.02 31.49 34.00 -0.01 34.36 25.08 0.10 22.58 28.08 0.03 27.31 31.08 -0.02 31.59 34.08 -0.01 34.41 25.17 0.10 22.70 28.17 0.03 27.44 31.17 -0.02 31.69 34.17 -0.01 34.47 25.25 0.10 22.83 28.25 0.02 27.58 31.25 -0.02 31.79 34.25 -0.01 34.52 25.33 0.09 22.95 28.33 0.02 27.71 31.33 -0.02 31.88 34.33 -0.01 34.58 25.42 0.09 23.08 28.42 0.02 27.84 31.42 -0.02 31.98 34.42 -0.01 34.63 25.50 0.09 23.20 28.50 0.02 27.97 31.50 -0.02 32.07 34.50 -0.01 34.68 25.58 0.09 23.33 28.58 0.02 28.10 31.58 -0.02 32.17 34.58 0.00 34.73 25.67 0.09 23.46 28.67 0.02 28.23 31.67 -0.02 32.26 34.67 0.00 34.77 25.75 0.08 23.58 28.75 0.01 28.36 31.75 -0.02 32.35 34.75 0.00 34.82 25.83 0.08 23.71 28.83 0.01 28.48 31.83 -0.02 32.44 34.83 0.00 34.86 25.92 0.08 23.84 28.92 0.01 28.61 31.92 -0.02 32.53 34.92 0.00 34.91 26.00 0.08 23.97 29.00 0.01 28.74 32.00 -0.02 32.62 35.00 0.00 34.95 26.08 0.08 24.10 29.08 0.01 28.86 32.08 -0.02 32.71 35.08 0.00 34.99 26.17 0.07 24.23 29.17 0.01 28.99 32.17 -0.02 32.79 35.17 0.00 35.03 26.25 0.07 24.37 29.25 0.00 29.11 32.25 -0.02 32.88 35.25 0.01 35.06 26.33 0.07 24.50 29.33 0.00 29.24 32.33 -0.02 32.96 35.33 0.01 35.10 26.42 0.07 24.63 29.42 0.00 29.36 32.42 -0.02 33.04 35.42 0.01 35.13 26.50 0.07 24.76 29.50 0.00 29.48 32.50 -0.02 33.12 35.50 0.01 35.17 26.58 0.06 24.90 29.58 0.00 29.60 32.58 -0.02 33.20 35.58 0.01 35.20 26.67 0.06 25.03 29.67 0.00 29.72 32.67 -0.02 33.28 35.67 0.01 35.23 26.75 0.06 25.16 29.75 0.00 29.84 32.75 -0.02 33.35 35.75 0.01 35.25 26.83 0.06 25.30 29.83 0.00 29.96 32.83 -0.02 33.43 35.83 0.02 35.28 26.92 0.06 25.43 29.92 -0.01 30.07 32.92 -0.02 33.50 35.92 0.02 35.30 27.00 0.05 25.57 30.00 -0.01 30.19 33.00 -0.02 33.58 36.00 0.02 35.32 27.08 0.05 25.70 30.08 -0.01 30.30 33.08 -0.02 33.65 36.08 0.02 35.34 27.17 0.05 25.84 30.17 -0.01 30.41 33.17 -0.02 33.72 36.17 0.02 35.36 27.25 0.05 25.97 30.25 -0.01 30.53 33.25 -0.02 33.79 36.25 0.02 35.38 27.33 0.04 26.11 30.33 -0.01 30.64 33.33 -0.02 33.86 36.33 0.03 35.39 27.42 0.04 26.24 30.42 -0.01 30.75 33.42 -0.02 33.93 36.42 0.03 35.40 27.50 0.04 26.38 30.50 -0.01 30.86 33.50 -0.01 33.99 36.50 0.03 35.41 27.58 0.04 26.51 30.58 -0.01 30.96 33.58 -0.01 34.06 36.58 0.03 35.42 27.67 0.04 26.64 30.67 -0.01 31.07 33.67 -0.01 34.12 36.67 0.03 35.42 27.75 0.04 26.78 30.75 -0.01 31.18 33.75 -0.01 34.18 36.75 0.04 35.43 27.83 0.03 26.91 30.83 -0.01 31.28 33.83 -0.01 34.24 36.83 0.04 35.43 27.92 0.03 27.05 30.92 -0.02 31.38 33.92 -0.01 34.30 36.92 0.04 35.42

Brand name 2010's 2011 2012 3 years
Average CAGR Remarks Codes Combine 24.28% 13.54% -6.86% 10.32% 10% -25%
In maturity Goto sleep 67.40% 25.05% 21.84% 38.10% Forever21 3.39% 49.05% 0.60% 17.68% CAGR of 3 companies 22.03%

By industry / age Number of businesses Number of workers take Average
age new
Establishment rate Per business
(persons) Per business
(one million won) Operating margin C manufacturing industry 327 3,418 10.5 1,464 4,481 0.5 January 10 7.9

Cordez Combine KOSDAQ search results are shown in FIG.

(14) Capitalization rate (WACC)

The capitalization rate of Codez Combine is calculated as (debt ratio x cost of debt) + (capital ratio x cost of equity). In other words, (72.35% x 5.94%) + (27.65% x 9.27%) = 6.68% is the capitalization rate (see Table 24 (Codes Combined Capitalization Analysis Table 1 (Unit:%))).

division Price Composition ratio Cost of Other Capital /
Cost of capital WACC Output basis fan 127,625,886,623 72.35% 5.94% 4.29% 72.35% x 5.94% capital 48,782,749,518 27.65% 9.27% 2.56% 27.65% x 9.27% Sum 176,408,636,141 100% 6.86%

The cost of debt of Coinz Combine is calculated by considering the actual cost of debt of capital x (1- corporate tax rate),

7.42% x (1-20%) = 5.94%.

Codes Combine's cost of equity is based on a three-year KTB yield plus a risk premium. As of December 31, 2012, the three-year KTB yield is 2.82% and Risk Premium is 6.45%. therefore

2.82% + 6.45% = 9.27% is calculated as the cost of equity capital of Codez Combine (see Table 25 (Table 2 (Unit:%))).

division Contents Interest rate Remarks Cost of debt Actual cost of debt 7.42% Cost of Combined Combine is calculated on the next page Corporate tax consideration 80% = (1-20%) (based on the bill: 200-200 billion won or less) 5.94% 7.42% X 80% Cost of equity 3-year Treasury Bond 2.82% Financial Investment Association data as of December 31, 2012 Risk Premium 6.45% According to Codes Combine 2012 financial statements
(2012.9.26-2014.9.26) KRW 4,500,000,000
The interest rate is 6.45%. In other words, if a credit rating is granted, the non-guaranteed corporate bond yield is used.
However, if there is no credit rating, the estimated return is calculated for a surrogate that has a similar financial and operating leverage and a corporate bond credit rating. 9.27% 2.82% + 6.24%

(15) Capitalization rate (WACC). Calculation of cost of debt

Table 26 shows the cost calculation table of cost of others.

Financial institutions Interest rate Loan amount opponent Cost of debt Industrial BAnk 9.24% 2,478,000,000 228,843,300 Hana Bank 5.91% 4,404,924,091 260,331,014 Our bank 8.48% 3,127,214,691 265,187,806 Shinhan Bank 6.40% 8,120,000,000 519,680,000 Lotte Insurance 5.90% 504,000,000 29,736,000 Industrial Bank 6.41% 1,950,000,000 124,995,000 Foreign Exchange Capital 8.00% 3,500,000,000 280,000,000 KD Capital 8.00% 4,250,000,000 340,000,000 Shinhan Capital 8.00% 4,250,000,000 340,000,000 H Financial 7.49% 33,336,435 2,496,899 Foreign Exchange Capital 8.00% 2,500,000,000 200,000,000 Katie Capital 8.00% 1,250,000,000 100,000,000 Shinhan Capital 8.00% 1,250,000,000 100,000,000 37,617,475,217 2,791,270,019 7.42%

2.2. Results of valuation of trademark rights through early model application

Table 27 shows the trademark calculation table for the initial model.

division 2013.12.31 2014.12.31 2015.12.31 2016.12.31 2017.08.31 Trademark Estimation 8,584,815,665 8,259,025,562 7,945,599,054 7,644,066,949 7,450,674,222 Corporate tax 1,716,963,133 1,651,805,112 1,589,119,811 1,528,813,390 1,490,134,844 Profit after trademark 6,867,852,532 6,607,220,449 6,356,479,243 6,115,253,559 5,960,539,378 WACC 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% Present Value Factor 0.9358 0.8758 0.8196 0.7670 0.7338 Present value 6,427,080,643 5,786,345,652 5,209,487,458 4,690,137,992 4,373,729,349 Trademark value 22,113,051,745

As shown in Table 27, the trademark value was estimated to be 22 billion won in the TSAM trademark calculation table. In other words, the value of 22 billion won was derived from the financial value of 0 won and the marketing value of 35.5 billion won, reflecting the marketing weight of 62%.

In addition, if the amount excluding adjustment costs is used, starting at W18,375,726,811 will result in W44.5bn. Therefore, the average price of 35.5 billion won and 44.5 billion won is estimated at 40.5 billion won, which can reduce the cost and time of TSAM trademark rights without making a big difference from the previous estimate of 39.9 billion won in April, 2013. It can be evaluated as the IP security loan model of the present invention.

Early model 2012 and 2013 trademark rights estimates (units) are shown in Table 28 below.

division 2012.12.31 2013.12.31 Trademark Estimation 8,923,457,066 8,584,815,665

As shown in Table 23, a decrease of 3.97% from the initial model 2012 of 8,923,457,066 won was reflected in 2013, resulting in 8,584,815,665 won. The 3.97% decline was due to the operating margin (-7,176,533,396 / 189,107,083,441) in the previous year.

Table 29 shows the trademark calculation table for the early models (using conjoint value only) in Korean won.

division 2013.12.31 2014.12.31 2015.12.31 2016.12.31 2017.08.31 Trademark
calculation 17,678,375,793 17,007,488,950 16,362,061,977 15,741,128,683 15,342,882,590 Corporate tax 3,535,675,159 3,401,497,790 3,272,412,395 3,148,225,737 3,068,576,518 Trademark
Profit after tax 14,142,700,634 13,605,991,160 13,089,649,581 12,592,902,946 12,274,306,072 WACC 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% Present value
Element 0.9358 0.8758 0.8196 0.7670 0.7338 Present value 13,235,036,289 11,915,595,732 10,727,694,171 9,658,218,088 9,006,650,120 Trademark
value 45,536,544,280

2.3. Evaluation of Trademark Value by Applying TSAM Model

Table 30 shows the TSAM trademark calculation table (KRW).

division 2013.12.31 2014.12.31 2015.12.31 2016.12.31 2017.08.31 Trademark Estimation 2,738,504,118 2,634,579,051 2,534,597,897 2,438,410,984 2,376,719,878 Corporate tax 547,700,824 526,915,810 506,919,579 487,682,197 475,343,976 Profit after trademark 2,190,803,294 2,107,663,241 2,027,678,317 1,950,728,787 1,901,375,902 WACC 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% Present Value Factor 0.9358 0.8758 0.8196 0.7670 0.7338 Present value 2,050,199,736 1,845,809,160 1,661,794,896 1,496,125,567 1,395,193,129 Trademark value 7,053,929,359

As shown in Table 30, the fundamental difference between TSAM-used trademarks and early model-used trademarks is whether or not there is a deduction factor due to IP security loans. If the trademark value using the initial model is 22 billion and the trademark value using TSAM is 7 billion, 15 billion is the deduction factor. This is because the value of the IP mortgage is conservative because it is future value.

Deduction factors in the trademarks used in the early models include the main trademark verification factor, the future value verification factor, and the securitization value verification factor.

Table 31 shows the TSAM 2012 and 2013 trademark rights estimation results (unit: KRW).

division 2012.12.31 2013.12.31 Trademark Estimation 2,846,528,670 2,738,504,118

As shown in Table 31, the trend was reduced by 3.97% from 2,846,528,670 won in TSAM 2012 to 2013, resulting in 2,738,504,118 won. The 3.97% decline was due to the operating margin (-7,176,533,396 / 189,107,083,441) in the previous year.

TSAM's second trademark evaluation, including TVAF, follows.

The TSAM model including TVAF is shown in Equation 4 below.

[Equation 4]

Validation Factor for Foreign Registered Trademarks-GLO adjust

* range

Lowest price 0-7 / 1,000 Highest price

* meaning

Registered trademarks abroad are used as indicators by country's registered trademarks and applications

* Indicator 1

Internationally registered trademarks are verified in accordance with the Madrid Protocol.

Country: 1.0 points from 6 countries

1.0 points from 6 countries / 0.9 points from 5 countries / 0.8 points from 4 countries / 0.7 points from 3 countries / 0.6 points from 2 countries / 0.5 points from 1 country

* Indicator 2

Number of registrations (Trademark X application): Total number of registrations 25 or more 1.0 points

Trademark X Applicants: 25 or more 1.0 points / 20-24 0.9 points / 15-19 0.8 points /

10-14 0.7 points / 6-9 0.6 points 1-5 0.5 points

* Remarks

GLO adjust = indicator1 X indicator2 = 1- 0.25

1 to 0.9 or less = 7 / 1,000,

0.8 or more but less than 0.9 = 6 / 1,000,

0.7 or more but less than 0.8 = 5 / 1,000,

0.6 or more but less than 0.7 = 4 / 1,000,

0.5 or more but less than 0.6 = 3 / 1,000,

0.4 or more but less than 0.5 = 2 / 1,000,

0.25 or more but less than 0.4 = 1 / 1,000.

Table 32 below shows a trademark calculation table (unit: KRW) using TSAF including TVAF.

division 2013.12.31 2014.12.31 2015.12.31 2016.12.31 2017.08.31 Trademark Estimation 2,741,242,622 2,637,213,630 2,537,132,494 2,440,849,395 2,379,096,598 Corporate tax 548,248,524 527,442,726 507,426,499 488,169,879 475,819,320 Trademark
Profit after tax 2,192,994,098 2,109,770,904 2,029,705,996 1,952,679,516 1,903,277,278 WACC 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% 6.86% Present value
Element 0.9358 0.8758 0.8196 0.7670 0.7338 Present value 2,052,249,935 1,847,654,970 1,663,456,691 1,497,621,692 1,396,588,322 Trademark value 7,060,983,288

The fundamental difference between TSAM-used trademarks and TSAM-used trademarks is the inclusion of global counting factors under the Madrid Protocol. The trademark value of TSAM using TVAF including TVAF is 7,060,983,288 and the value of TSAM using trademark except TVAF is 7,053,929,359, which is a difference of 7 million won.

Table 33 below shows the TSAM 2013 trademark rights estimate (unit: KRW) including TVAF.

division 2012.12.31 2013.12.31 Trademark Estimation 2,849,375,199 2,741,242,622

As shown in Table 33, a trend of 3.97% decreased from KRW 2,849,375,199 for TSAM with TVAF 2012 was reflected in 2013, resulting in KRW 2,741,242,622. The decline of 3.97% is based on the operating margin (-7,176,533,396 / 189,107,083,441) x100 of the previous year.

2.4. Comprehensive Results of Trademark Value

Codes Combine trademark evaluation results table (unit: won) is shown in Table 34 below.

division Funding amount importance Price Remarks infancy
Model result
Result Marketing value 18,375,726,811 62.22% 11,430,539,848 Financial value 0 37.80% 0 Amount deducted (advertising costs) 2,523,376,382 Advertising expenses 2012 Amount to be added (trademark) 16,293,600 271,560 X 60 1) Trademark Estimation Level 1-ⓐ 8,923,457,066 TSAM
Result Index of Trademark Rights Subject to Evaluation-ⓑ 99.70% 8,897,075,415 Ⓐ X ⓑ Major Trademark Verification Index-ⓒ 69.33% 6,168,600,350 Ⓑ X ⓒ Future Value Verification Index-ⓓ 94.00% 5,798,484,329 Ⓒ X ⓓ Securitization value verification index-ⓔ 49.09% 2,846,528,670 Ⓓ X ⓔ Trademark Estimation Level 2 Value 2,846,528,670 TVAF
Add
TSAM
Model
Result Global trademark addition index -ⓕ 1 / 1,000 2,846,529 Ⓕ X ⓔ Trademark Estimation Level 3 2,849,375,199

The amount of trademark rights to be added is the filing fee (56,000 won) + registration fee (215,560 won) = 271,560 won out of 60 registered trademarks.

Referring to Table 35 below (sensitivity analysis of input trademark value (unit: won)), the trademark value result of the initial model is calculated at 43.5 billion won. In the initial model, the consolidation is estimated at W36.5bn when the consolidation is converted to 100%.

In the past, the Bank of Korea commissioned foreign institutions to evaluate the brand value of Codes Combine, which is not much different from the case of about 39.9 billion won worth.

However, the result of this early model is that the 43.5 billion won does not reflect the marketing weight and financial weight at all, and only brand value is calculated in terms of marketing.

Therefore, the trademark valuation model of the present invention was studied, and the result was a TSAM model. The TSAM model is a model that has been studied to produce a more accurate result price than the earlier model.

In the TSAM model, a deduction verification factor was used to calculate the conservative point of view, and W7bn was calculated as a result of the code evaluation of Codez Combine.

In addition, the TSAM model using TVAF global addition verification coefficient was estimated to be 7 billion won, indicating no significant difference.

division Trademark Value Conjoint
100% reflected value Service life, present value
Reflected trademark value Conjoint value (total reflection) 18,375,726,811 45,536,544,280 45,536,544,280 Conjoint value (62% reflected) 11,430,539,848 45,536,544,280 28,325,806,608 TSAM 2,846,528,670 11,377,305,417 7,053,929,359 TSAM (including TVAF) 2,849,375,199 11,388,682,722 7,060,983,288

Alternatively, the value of the collateral security may be calculated by reflecting other indicators. For example, Table 36 of the following body friend calculation method may be used as an exemplary calculation model, but the present invention is not limited thereto.

(In millions of Korean won) division `15.12 `16.12 `17.12 `18.12 `19.12 `20.12 `21.07 sales 145,110 167,826 194,405 225,509 261,901 304,467 215,651 OP margin
(Before adjustment element) 26.57% 23.61% 20.65% 17.69% 14.73% 11.77% 11.77% Marketing
evaluation Trademark
Contribution 16.27% 16.27% 16.27% 16.27% 16.27% 16.27% 16.27% Operating profit 6,272 6,446 6,531 6,490 6,276 5,830 4,129 Financial
evaluation Trademark
Contribution 29.00% 29.00% 29.00% 29.00% 29.00% 29.00% 29.00% Operating profit 11,179 11,489 11,640 11,567 11,187 10,392 7,360 Operating profit before adjusted 8,726 8,968 9,086 9,029 8,731 8,111 5,745 Adjustment
Cost Advertising
Propagation rate 4.01% 3.32% 2.63% 1.94% 1.25% 0.57% 0.57% Advertising
Propaganda costs 5,814 5,569 5,114 4,381 3,286 1,725 1,222 Trademark after adjustment
Operating profit 2,912 3,398 3,972 4,648 5,445 6,385 4,523 Corporation tax 641 748 874 1,023 1,198 1,405 995 After-tax trademark operating income 2,271 2,651 3,098 3,625 4,247 4,981 3,528 Capitalization 7.02% 7.02% 7.02% 7.02% 7.02% 7.02% 7.02% Currently Chichiso 0.9344 0.8731 0.8158 0.7623 0.7123 0.6656 0.6399 Present value 2,122 2,314 2,527 2,764 3,026 3,315 2,257 Trademark value
(`14. 12. 31) 18,326 + Trademark Spending (4) = 18,330 Trademark Security Value
(`14. 12. 31) A X TVSF = B Trademark security value ('14. 12. 31) BX (1+ TVAF)

On the other hand, when evaluating the security value of a trademark, in particular its future value, it may take into account factors related to the property, in particular, default, of the company in which the trademark is held, for example:

2. The operating margin ratio starts from (the previous year's trademark trademark operating margin-free operating margin in the industry to be evaluated) and converges to the operating margin of the three average brands and the average brands of the industry and the same industry for the service life. The proportion is applied to AHP.

Here, the three competitive brands are three brands used for conjoint, meaning no brand, identity brand, positioning brand and corresponding brand. The operating margin of the same industry sector is analyzed using the Bank of Korea corporate management analysis data.

Adjustment factor OP margin before adjustment means the amount of advertising expense ratio added to the existing OP margin.

Convergence of the advertising service life ratio is also the same as the operating margin.

3. Trademark Rights by Marketing Evaluation Operating profit is the contribution of trademark rights gained from the operating margin to X consolidation before adjustment.

4. The formula of financial trademark contribution is as follows.

Trademark Contribution = Maximum Realized Intangible Asset Value Ratio by Industry (Intangible Asset Value / Corporate Market Value) Trademark (Brand) Asset Ratio

5. Trademark operating profit based on financial valuation is calculated by sales X operating margin before adjustment.

6. Pre-adjustment trademark operating profit shall be determined by applying AHP weights to operating income from marketing evaluation and operating income from financial evaluation.

7. Calculate the advertising cost by multiplying the ratio by the advertising rate by number 2.

8. Post-adjusted trademark operating profit is the sum of pre-adjusted trademark operating profit plus advertising expenses.

9. After-tax trademark operating profit is the amount of trademark operating profit after adjustment less tax.

10. Estimate the present value for each year after considering the present value factor by substituting capitalization rate through WACC.

11. Calculate the value of a trademark by adding up the trademark value that is registered at its present value.

The registered trademark value is calculated as shown in Table 38 below. Body friends are added up if they are the same or similar.

number brand Goods Registration Number registration date Applicant current status One

10 40-0643956-00-00 2005-12-20 Woong Cheol Kang Enrollment 2

10 40-0952804-00-00 2013-02-08 Woong Cheol Kang Enrollment 3

10 40-0952803-00-00 2013-02-08 Woong Cheol Kang Enrollment 4

10 40-0952802-00-00 2013-02-08 Woong Cheol Kang Enrollment 5

10 40-0643958-00-00 2005-12-20 Woong Cheol Kang Enrollment 6

10 40-0714014-00-00 2007-06-19 Woong Cheol Kang Enrollment 7

10 40-0714013-00-00 2007-06-19 Woong Cheol Kang Enrollment 8

44 41-0270284-00-00 2013-10-07 Woong Cheol Kang Enrollment 9

10,44 45-0048463-00-00 2014-03-06 Woong Cheol Kang Enrollment 10

10,44 45-0045404-00-00 2013-07-09 Woong Cheol Kang Enrollment 11

44 Application number
41-2014-0043030 Application date
2014-10-21 Woong Cheol Kang Application

Here, except for the trademark right for the application, the actual cost is calculated.

number registration date Goods Written
Application fee Registration fee Registration tax Sum By registration day
Sum One 2005-12-20 10 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 2 2005-12-20 10 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 574,240 3 2007-06-19 10 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 4 2007-06-19 10 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 574,240 5 2013-02-08 10 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 6 2013-02-08 10 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 7 2013-02-08 10 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 861,360 8 2013-07-09 44 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 9 2013-07-09 10 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 574,240 10 2013-10-07 10 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 287,120 11 2014-03-06 44 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 12 2014-03-06 10 67,000 211,000 9,120 287,120 574,240

Evaluation date December 31, 2014

number registration date 3 years
Government bonds Total registered day 2007
-06-19 2013
-02-08 2013
-07-09 2013
-10-07 2014
-03-06 2014
-12-31 One 2005-12-20 4.97% 574,240 617,536 2 2007-06-19 5.24% 574,240 574,240 3 2007-06-19 1,191,776 1,589,936 4 2013-02-08 2.72% 861,360 861,360 5 2013-02-08 2,451,296 2,478,845 6 2013-07-09 2.99% 574,240 574,240 7 2013-07-09 3,053,085 3,075,593 8 2013-10-07 2.84% 287,120 287,120 9 2014-03-06 3,362,713 3,401,898 10 2014-03-06 2.895% 574,240 574,240 2014-12-31 3,976,138 4,070,825

If trademark names are different, trademark rights are calculated and calculated.

Trade name Registration Number registration date Applicable Remarks Breworx 4103510350000 20160304 41 4103510360000 20160304 43 4103560000000 20160415 35 4011567750000 20160125 07 4103510390000 20160304 40 ChiQueen 4102379960000 20120817 43 collabo 4103815910000 20161226 43

Trade name Registration Number registration date 3-year government bond yield Sum Breworx 4011567750000 20160125 1.621% 292,120 4103510350000 20160304 1.522% 292,120 4103510360000 20160304 1.522% 292,120 4103510390000 20160304 1.522% 292,120 4103560000000 20160415 1.494% 292,120 ChiQueen 4102379960000 20120817 2.930% 287,120 collabo 4103815910000 20161226 1.669% 292,120

1) Breworx Trademark value ( Unit: Won )

Date Registration Number Trademark value  Jan 25, 2016 (1) 4011567750000  292,120 Suspension Factor 1.0017  March 04, 2016 (2) 292,622 March 04, 2016 (3) 4103510350000
4103510360000
4103510390000  876,360 March 04, 2016 (2) + (3) 1,168,982 Suspension Factor 1.0017 Apr 15, 2016 (4) 1,171,016 April 15, 2016 (5) 4103560000000 292,120 April 15, 2016 (4) + (5) 1,463,136 Suspension Factor 1.0234 06 Nov 2017 1,497,415

2) ChiQueen  Trademark value ( Unit: Won )

Date Registration Number Trademark value  August 17, 2012 (1) 4102379960000 287,120 Suspension Factor 1.1629 06 Nov 2017 333,880

3) collabo  Trademark value ( Unit: Won )

Date Registration Number Trademark value  December 26, 2016 (1) 4103815910000 292,120 Suspension Factor 1.0144 06 Nov 2017 296,336

The present invention can be used in the appraisal industry, the credit industry, and the like which utilize intangible assets such as trademarks, such as valuation, credit transactions, and collateral.

Although the present invention has been described in detail only with respect to the described embodiments, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that various modifications and changes are possible within the technical spirit of the present invention, and such modifications and modifications belong to the appended claims.

(Not drawing)

Claims (11)

(1) Analyzing operating profits of trademarks that are received or stored through telecommunications networks; trademark value (F _Excessreturn ), conjoint analysis trademark value (M _conj. ), Weight of conjoint analysis trademark (a), operating profit analysis Storing the weight (b) and the adjustment cost (AC) on a storage medium in a database;
(2) Operating profit analysis trademark value (F _Excessreturn ), conjoint analysis trademark value (M _conj. ), Weight of conjoint analysis trademark (a), weight of operating profit analysis trademark (b) and adjustment costs from the database ( Reading AC), inputting the duration (n), tax and discount rate (r) of the trademark, and performing computer programming using the following Equation 1 to evaluate the collateral value of the trademark; And
(3) the preference and / or non-favorability of the trademark, based on the number of times the keyword has been entered or stored in the trademark by the consumer during the evaluation of the collateral value of the trademark. Storing the database on a storage medium, and applying weights of the preferences and / or non-favorites to the collateral value of the trademarks obtained in the step (2) to apply weights related to consumer preferences, respectively;
Trademark collateral valuation method comprising:
[Equation 1]

In Equation 1, TV is a Trademark rights value,
TVSF is a Trademark rights Value subtraction factor. The method of claim 1,
The preference of a trademark is valued within the range of 0 to 100% in proportion to the number of times a user inputs a keyword of a positive meaning of the keyword transmitted or stored through the network during the evaluation of the security value of the trademark. Trademark collateral valuation method characterized in that the displayed. The method of claim 1,
The non-preferability of a trademark is reduced within the range of 0 to 100% in proportion to the number of times a unit enters a negative keyword of a consumer that is transmitted or stored through the network during the evaluation of the security value of the trademark. Trademark collateral valuation method characterized in that the displayed. The method of claim 1,
The conjoint analysis trademark value value (M _conj. ) Is a method for evaluating trademark collateral value, characterized in that calculated using Equation 2 below:
[Equation 2]
Conjoint Analysis Trademark Value = Marketing Trademark Operating Profit Value = Valuable Trademark Sales * Operating Profit Margin Before Adjustment * Adjusted Trademark Utility = Trademark Contribution
In Equation 2, the evaluation target trademark utility is to quantify the attributes of the trademark through expert advice or interviews. The method of claim 1,
The trademark profit value analysis method characterized in that the operating profit analysis trademark value (F _Excessreturn ) is a value calculated using Equation 3 below:
[Equation 3]
Operating Profit Analysis Trademark Value = Value that reflects AHP's share of trademark operating profit by marketing evaluation and trademark operating profit by financial evaluation The method of claim 1,
The conjoint analysis trademark weight weight and operating profit analysis trademark weight weight value is a value calculated by an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) of trademark evaluation experts. The method of claim 1,
The method of claim collateral value, characterized in that the adjusted cost is the sum of the advertising costs and trademark costs. The method of claim 1,
And receiving and storing the trademark registration, the duration of the registered trademark right from a database associated with the trademarks of the respective patent offices and treaties of Madrid via a telecommunication network. The method of claim 1,
Evaluating the value of the trademark right by performing computer programming using Equation 4 in place of Equation 1 to evaluate the value of the trademark.
[Equation 4]

In Equation 4, the ratio (TRratio) occupied by the evaluation target trademark among the trademark rights held by the trademark deduction factor (TVDF), the coefficient for verifying whether the evaluation target trademark is the main trademark right of the company, and the evaluation target trademark Is selected from the coefficient for verifying future value of the product (FVV adjust) and the coefficient for verifying the securitization of the trademark under review (TV adjust), and the trademark addition factor (TVAF) is registered in the overseas Madrid It is a factor that adds up to what is done. The method of claim 1,
Trademark collateral value is additionally reflected in the evaluation of the security value of trademark rights, wherein the total useful life is calculated by a formula (the total useful life = the time of evaluation from the date of establishment + the average useful life of the company to which the subject company belongs). Assessment Methods. The method of claim 1,
The trademark collateral valuation additionally reflects the trademark operating profit from the financial valuation, and the trademark operating profit from the financial valuation is calculated (the trademark operating profit from the financial valuation = sales X operating margin before adjustment) X financial Trademark credit value).

Images