2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant is against the defendant while making a confession of the crime, that the defendant has no criminal record for the same kind of crime, that the defendant has seized the above Article, and that the defendant is not adequate for economic conditions as a basic living recipient.

However, in light of the following: (a) the instant crime infringes upon the right of a legitimate owner of a trademark right and disturbs market economy order; (b) the Defendant’s liability is not less than that of a fine; and (c) the Defendant’s previous convictions are five times; and (d) other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is groundless

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. It is so decided as per Disposition.