2. There are extenuating circumstances such as the Defendant’s confessioning of the instant crime and having no record of the same kind of crime.

However, the crime of this case is committed not only undermining the business reputation of a trademark right holder, but also undermining the sound market order, and thus, the quality of the crime is not good, the defendant has been punished twice by a fine, and there is no change in the circumstances that may be considered in the court below, and other various circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, including the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, means and result of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, are considered, it does not seem that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit.

[However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, if the court below ex officio and ex officio dismissed the "Trademark Act" as the "former Trademark Act (wholly amended by Act No. 14033, Feb. 29, 2016)" in the application of the law of the reasoning of the judgment below, it shall be corrected.