A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant merely committed an act according to G’s instruction and management, the president, and there is no intention to commit the instant crime. 2) When the Defendant, when requesting a patent attorney to file a trademark registration application, requested the patent attorney to use the character of this case, and asked the patent attorney about whether the character of this case was used without any problem, and thus, the pertinent patent attorney did not have the awareness of illegality.

B. In light of the overall circumstances of unreasonable sentencing, the sentence imposed by the court below (1.5 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, as to the assertion that there is no criminal intent, the defendant proposed that the clothing business was defective in G with I character, the defendant directly designed I character, and the defendant led the patent attorney to file a trademark application through the patent attorney, so the defendant has the criminal intent to commit a violation of the Copyright Act. Therefore, as to the assertion that there is no awareness of illegality, Article 16 of the Criminal Act provides that the defendant's act of misunderstanding that his act did not constitute a crime under the law is not punishable only when there is a justifiable reason. However, in a case where the defendant's act of misunderstanding that he did not constitute a crime under the law is generally a crime, but in his special case, it is recognized that it does not constitute a crime permitted under the law, and if there is a justifiable reason to perceive it, it shall not be punishable. Whether there is a justifiable reason is sufficient to avoid his intellectual ability by examining or inquiring about the possibility of illegality of his act by himself.