The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal: The entire process of the production of the damaged company is clearly distinguished from other products in the form of the production of the damaged company, thereby acquiring the function of indicating the origin of the product and acquiring the well-knownness in Korea.

Although the Defendant’s act of selling the product that imitated the design of the above product constitutes an act of confusion with the subject of the product as stipulated in Article 2(1)(a) of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act, the lower court acquitted the Defendant, and so the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The conviction in a criminal trial shall be based on evidence with probative value, which can lead a judge to have a conviction against the facts charged beyond a reasonable doubt, and if there is no such proof, the conviction cannot be judged even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant (see Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001; 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006, etc.). In addition, in light of the fact that the appellate court has the character as a follow-up trial despite its appearance and the fact that the appellate court has the character as a follow-up trial in light of the spirit of substantial direct trial as prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Act, there is insufficient evidence that the first instance court is insufficient to exclude a reasonable doubt after undergoing the examination of evidence such as a witness.

In a case where a not-guilty verdict is rendered on the facts charged, if it does not reach the extent that it can sufficiently resolve the reasonable doubt raised by the first instance trial even if the probability or doubt about some opposing facts may be raised as a result of the appellate trial’s examination, there is an error of mistake in the determination of facts in the first instance judgment, which lacks proof of crime solely

F. The Defendants cannot be found guilty of facts charged (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do11428, Feb. 18, 2016). B. The lower court is on the sales website.