beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.08.09 2018고단1998

상표법위반

Text

The punishment of the accused shall be eight months by imprisonment.

However, the sentence shall be executed for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From February 5, 2018 to February 6, 2018, the Defendant: (a) manufactured 171 points on a fake n.e., a fake trademark (trademark registration number: 094493) registered with the Korean Intellectual Property Office as designated goods by the trademark owner “Seen n. B. B” as a trademark owner at a factory located on the first basement B in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul; and (b) stored 1,778 points on a fake n.e., a total of 1,778 points (203,787,00 won in presumption of the fixed goods market price) as indicated in the daily list of crimes in the attached Table (203,787,00 won in total) and stored 868 points in clothing, such as 10 to 14 items on the daily list of crimes, such as a fake n.e., a total of n., clothes n.s.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each investigation report (the result of an appraisal reply / replys to the computation of the fixed price);

1. A written appraisal, the ledger of the registration of a trademark with a reasonable price, control photographs over the site, and photographs of the suspect's seized articles;

1. Application of seizure records and statutes concerning the list of seizure;

1. Article 230 of the Trademark Act and the choice of punishment concerning facts constituting an offense, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing of Article 236(1) of the Trademark Act is a crime that infringes on the right of the registered trademark right holder and seriously disturbs the order of trade in the product market, and the trademark infringement goods are not less complicated than the nature of the crime because the quantity of the trademark infringement goods is very large.

On the other hand, the defendant seems to be recognized as committing the crime of this case and there is no record of criminal punishment in addition to criminal punishment of fines once in 2015.

In addition, the sentencing conditions shown in the records, such as the defendant's age, occupation, sex, family relationship, and circumstances before and after the crime, shall be determined as per the order.