상표법위반
The appeal is dismissed.
Of the 7 pages of the judgment of the court of first instance, the sales volume of "100" shall be "90", and the sales amount shall be "9."
The grounds of appeal are examined.
Where an act of infringement of trademark rights as prescribed in Article 93 of the Trademark Act continues to exist with respect to several registered trademarks, one crime is established by combining each trademark right holder and each other. Thus, barring any special circumstance, it cannot be deemed that one crime is constituted by combining several acts of infringement of trademark rights different from the trademark right holder on the ground that the trademark is identical
(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, the lower court’s determination that the facts charged in the instant case and the summary order established cannot be deemed to constitute a single crime is justifiable, and the allegation in the grounds of appeal purporting that finding the Defendant guilty of the modified facts charged constitutes double punishment is not acceptable.
Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and since it is evident that there are errors in the judgment of the court of first instance, it shall be corrected under Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.