A. In fact-finding or legal principles, the Defendants: (a) purchased genuine products from Gaba, Green Co., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter “Hain”) and sold them again; (b) although the Defendants did not infringe on the network’s trademark right in accordance with the legal doctrine of the exhaustion of rights, the lower court convicted the Defendants by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby convicting the Defendants.

B. In light of the fact that the amount of damage caused by the unfair defendants to sell the network products and thereby infringing trademark rights is not KRW 916,970,000 as stated in the facts charged, but KRW 24,464,00,00, the sentence imposed by the court below (each fine of KRW 7,000,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court entered into a contract with the Plaintiff on the terms of contract from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2008 (hereinafter “instant license agreement”) under which the Plaintiff owns an exclusive right to manufacture, sell, etc. the products using the Defendant’s trademark (hereinafter “instant license agreement”) with the Plaintiff. After six months from the expiration date of the contract term, the Plaintiff removed all labels and trademarks that were not disposed of and all distinguishable from the Defendant’s goods on which the trademark was attached in a way that it is impossible to remove any possible signs, and the Plaintiff was obliged to remove the products on which the trademark was attached (hereinafter “instant mandatory provisions”) and the Plaintiff Company 1 and the Plaintiff Company 2 and the Plaintiff Company 2 did not own the exclusive right to purchase the products from the Plaintiff’s representative director to the third party (hereinafter “Defendant Company 1 and the Plaintiff Company 2”).