beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the fact that the defendant delivered goods imported from China in several hundreds of time, the defendant was entrusted with the delivery of counterfeit goods by item, the defendant arranged the inventory of counterfeit goods by item, sent the false name to the defective person, and determined the quantity of counterfeit goods imported from Korea on the basis of the false name, etc., the fact that the defendant conspired with the poor person in name in order to participate in the crime of smuggling can be fully recognized.
Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the violation of the Trademark Act due to the violation of the Customs Act and the use of trademark right, and the judgment of the court below is erroneous.
B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (guilty part of the judgment of the lower court) by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, and 160 hours of community service order) is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. 1) The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant: (i) was a person who acts on behalf of the J in the name of the Defendant; and (ii) was issued a proposal to the effect that, on around 2016, the Defendant sent the original body in which the fingers, etc. are concealed; and (iii) was informed in the e-mail after receiving the article in which the e-mail would cause the delivery to the domestic delivery box; (iv) was accepted; and (v) the Defendant conspired to remove the original body in which the sons, etc. are concealed; and (v) the Defendant, upon sending the original body in which the sons, etc. are concealed, planned to deliver the concealed sons, etc. within the country by demolishing the original body, to the head of the relevant customs office.
Nevertheless, on January 2, 2018, the Defendant did not report to the head of Pyeongtaek-si Customs office in Pyeongtaek-si according to the above public offering, and the Defendant is as shown in attached Table 1, such as forgery Klock sent by the above winners of the above public offering to China.