All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

The defendant had a second trademark (2) of the crime sight table in the decision of the court below for the purpose of using a mistake as to the summary of the reasons for appeal.

The punishment of the court below (two years of suspended sentence in August) which is unfair in sentencing is too unfortunate and unfair.

The sentence of the lower court (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the prosecutor's assertion of mistake, the court below held that the defendant did not keep the attached list (2) in the investigative agency for the purpose of using a fake label.

The repeatedly stated statement (Evidence No. 24, 39) and ② there was no machine, equipment, and human resources to attach the above label to fake clothes, etc. on the warehouse where the Defendant kept the above label. There was no evidence to know that there was a contract relationship between the Defendant and the person holding or holding such machines, equipment, human resources, etc.; ③ there was no evidence to know that there was a contract relationship between the Defendant and the person holding or holding such machines, equipment, human resources, etc.; ③ there was a photograph of evidence records; ③ a label (Evidence on the 46th page, 47th section of evidence records) attached to the DSURED’s clothes, etc. attached to the Defendant’s “DSUREDD”, and a label (Evidence No. 47th page of evidence records) attached to the Defendant’s “DSURED” clothes, which were stored by the Defendant, different from the Defendant’s “DUDD” type “DUDD” in which the Defendant kept the “DUREDD” clothes (Evidence 3333).

The defendant used the labels for the above clothing, etc.

For reasons such as it is difficult to see that the defendant used a trademark identical or similar to the registered trademark for the purpose of using it on the goods identical or similar to the designated goods.

The prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit, since it is justified to determine that there is a lack of recognition and no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The defendant is the court below's decision as to the improper argument of sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor.