A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, on November 2015, at the Defendant’s residence located in the third floor of the Daegu Jung-gu B Building, Daegu-gu, 2015, via the mobile phone fluor “products” in the cell phone fluor. The Defendant is the highest product for the male and female fluorg gold blus, solar blus, and does not receive correspondence.

The phrase “” posted an advertisement, such as a label of a fake trademark, with an intention to sell a label of a fake trademark to buyers who reported and contacted the above advertisement.

On December 12, 2015, the Defendant infringed on the trademark rights of the said trademark right holder by holding and keeping the 10 foot Belgium attached with a trademark identical to the trademark registered with the Korean Intellectual Property Office under No. 010463 in the temporary parking lot of the Daegu Dong-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-ro, 162-1 (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu Dog-gu Dog-gu Dog-gu Dog-gu Dog-do, where the Defendant possessed and stored the said trademark right holder’s trademark right by the company to sell it to the Korean Intellectual Property Office as a trademark holder.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C’s statement;

1. Police seizure records and list of seizure;

1. The original register of each trademark;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the screen by cutting off on-site photographs and a stopter;

1. Each Article 93 of the Trademark Act regarding criminal facts;

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 reason for sentencing of Article 97-2 (1) of the Trademark Act [the scope of recommendation] The act of infringing on registration rights, where the infringing goods are not distributed (1 month to 1 year) in the mitigated area (1 month to 1 year), [the person subject to special mitigation] [the decision of sentence] the crime of this case is not easy in that the defendant committed again the crime of this case even though he had the record of being fined twice as the same crime, in that he committed the crime of this case again, even though he had the record of being fined twice as the crime of this case, the crime of this case.