beta
Text
Defendant
A Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months.
Defendant
B Defendant B shall be punished by one year.
except that this judgment.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
【Defendant A’s history of crime: Details of the judgment on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny): Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year and six months: September 11, 2013, violation of the Trademark Act (2005) by Defendant B (SP) (MF) (MF) on the completion of the execution of punishment on September 11, 2013: Violation of the Trademark Act (MF) by a fine of one million won (Seoul Northern District Court) (2009): 1.5 million won (SPF branch branch branch branch branch branch branch branch of Incheon District Court)
1. On April 27, 2016, under the joint criminal acts committed by Defendant A and Defendant B, the name influence (hereinafter “H”) is a person who operates an Internet shopping mall I (J) that sells the collections of physical composition, such as the overseas well-known trademark (i.e., the overseas well-known trademark), the ID, and the clothes.
Defendant
A [Defendant 1(A)]
B. On April 2015, 2015, other Defendants would offer KRW 150,000 per week to manage the website bulletin board in operating the Internet shopping mall from H’s policeman.
In hearing the phrase “H”, accepting the proposal of “H”, from that time to that time, he/she prepared and posted an advertisement as if the sports agents connected to the above site and sold in the shopping mall, as if they were authentic products, and the sports paintings purchased from the above shopping mall were refined products and products with good quality.
During that period, Defendant 1(A) will give 3 million won per month at the time of leaving the customer center to China from “H”.
“H” and accepted the proposal of “H” from May 6, 2015 to May 25, 2015, and entered Korea on June 26, 2015 on the ground that the said bulletin board management and customer telephone consultation (K) was not given to the office located in the U.S., from the time to June 25, 2015.
However, Defendant 1(A) is an alternative engineer or a mobile phone (M) of Defendant 2(B) using his mobile phone (L) upon the request of the Do “H” from around September 23, 2015 to around September 23, 2015.