2. The Defendant, while operating a small-scale business entity, appears to be not significantly significant in the scale of the crime, and there are favorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s misunderstanding of one’s own misconduct, but at the same time, the Defendant committed the instant crime at the time when the Defendant had been punished four times as a fine due to a violation of the same kind of trademark law, and there is no change in sentencing conditions that may be considered in the appellate trial, including the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime at the same time, and that there is no change in sentencing conditions that may be considered in the appellate trial, it is difficult to view the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, even if examining in detail, it is difficult to view that the first instance court’s sentence is too unreasonable.

Therefore, we do not accept the above argument of the defendant's above sentencing.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.