The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, additional collection of KRW 113,635,00) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The Defendant recognized the instant crime and recognized the first offender.

However, the defendant committed the crime of this case for about three years, and the actual profits of the defendant acquired by the crime is also reasonable.

In particular, the crime of violating the Trademark Act violates the legitimate trademark right holder's right and at the same time it disturbs the market economy order and damages the consumer's trust, and there is no new change in the circumstances that can change the sentence of the court below in the first instance.

In addition, taking into account the following circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, health status (a.g., family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, and the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case’s records and the previous theories, the sentence imposed by the lower court is not hot and hot within the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.