However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year and six months from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant is a person who operates a clothing store in the trade name of "C" in Busan Jin-gu B 158.

No one shall deliver, sell, forge, imitate, or possess any trademark identical or similar to another person's registered trademark for the purpose of using or allowing another person to use such trademark on goods similar to the designated goods.

On February 2, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 14:41, Japan, the trademark holder of the above clothing store, held the trademark right for the purpose of selling 67 points for a total of 462 points, such as stacks in the attached list of crimes, which are possessed for the purpose of selling 30,753,00 won of the market price of the well-known with a trademark similar to the trademark “Satt (Trademark No. 0840288)” designated by the Korean Intellectual Property Office and registered with the Korean Intellectual Property Office as clothing, etc.; and (b) infringed the trademark right of the trademark right holder duly registered with the trademark right holder, by possessing for the purpose of selling the clothes of total of 462 points, including stacks with the market price of 91,785,500 won of the well-known goods.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each investigation report (at least two to four, 10), trademark registration register;

1. Application of seizure records and statutes concerning the list of seizure;

1. Article 230 of the Trademark Act concerning facts constituting an offense (including the fact of infringement of trademark rights and the fact of registered trademark);

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition (only between violations of each Trademark Act);

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. For reasons for sentencing under Article 236(1) of the Trademark Act, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of one million won for a violation of the Trademark Act on November 15, 2016. The Defendant repeated the instant crime within a short period thereafter, and the amount of counterfeit trademark products possessed is not significant. However, the Defendant’s failure to repeat a crime against his/her criminal act is deemed to constitute a living offense; the Defendant appears to constitute a living offense; the Defendant does not have any criminal record on all other occasions than the above fine and one time; the Defendant’s age, character, conduct and environment, etc. are also considered.