Interpretation case: The Supreme People's Procuratorate protested according to law and the judgment was changed. The "Mona Lisa" trademark dispute case ended at the end of 10 years. Interpretation expert: Guo He, deputy director of the Intellectual Property Procuratorate Research Base of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and vice president and professor of the School of Intellectual Property of Renmin University of China, on June 14, 2022, the Beijing Municipal High Court made a retrial decision on the administrative dispute case about the "Mona Lisa" trademark, and revoked the first and second judgments of the case, Maintain the decision of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the former State Administration for Industry and Commerce. This case was protested by the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court appointed the Beijing Municipal High Court for retrial. The retrial decision marks the success of the Supreme Court's protest. At the same time, this case is also the first administrative litigation case handled by the Supreme Procuratorate after the establishment of the Intellectual Property Procuratorate Office. For a long time, the approval and prosecution of criminal cases have been considered as the main business of the People's Procuratorate. In the eyes of the public, the typical image of the prosecutor is the prosecutor. However, according to the Constitution, "the People's Procuratorate of the People's Republic of China is the legal supervision organ of the country", "the People's Procuratorate independently exercises procuratorial power in accordance with the provisions of the law and is not subject to interference by administrative organs, social organizations and individuals", "The Supreme People's Procuratorate is responsible to the National People's Congress and the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. Local people's procuratorates at all levels are responsible to the organs of state power that created it and the people's procuratorates at higher levels.". The same provisions are also contained in the Organic Law of the People's Procuratorate. The legal supervision organ is the clear and unique definition of the People's Procuratorate in the Constitution and the law. However, compared with the supervision of criminal investigation, the overall position of the People's Procuratorate as a legal supervision organ is often ignored in reality. Throughout the world, the predictability of intellectual property cases is relatively low compared with most other ordinary cases. This is because the scope of intellectual property law adjustment is mostly related to innovation, many cases have no precedent, and the existing laws are mostly the summary of past experience, and many cases have to be handled through the interpretation of existing legal provisions. In this sense, compared with traditional criminal, civil or administrative cases, there are more uncertainties in the trial of cases involving intellectual property rights. For example, in the absence of clear legal provisions, when applying a legal provision that needs to be interpreted, the law enforcers often interpret it according to their own knowledge structure and thinking habits, which inevitably leads to the fact that the judges may choose different theoretical models and then adopt different value judgment standards, making the discretion of the case relatively large. This problem is mainly reflected in the inconsistent judgment standards of the case in the trial work. This may be the reason why intellectual property disputes in some countries can be settled only after all legal remedies are exhausted. Based on the characteristics of intellectual property law and its implementation, legal supervision, especially in the application of law, is particularly necessary. This kind of supervision is the same whether it is the judicial trial of intellectual property, or the administrative enforcement or adjudication. Compared with European and American countries, the status of the procuratorate's legal supervision organ in China has its own characteristics. Due to the increasing role of intellectual property in modern society, it is appropriate for the People's Procuratorate to intervene in intellectual property disputes for legal supervision