logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.03.13 2013노3281
상표법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there was a fact that the Defendant alleged a mistake of facts had dealt with the original body in violation of the Trademark Act (hereinafter “the original body of this case”), the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case by misunderstanding the fact that the original body of this case was in violation of the Trademark Act, and thereby adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence (one million won of fine) on the ground of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the trademark similarity between the appearance of the trademark attached to the original body of this case and the normal trademark "LOI" or "GUCCI" is recognized. In addition, even though the defendant had been operating the booming point in the trade name "D" since 1983, he only paid 30% of the normal original body price and purchased the original body of this case as dumping, and in reality, the "lugor" or "GUCC" mark is distributed at a high level in the market and the main body of this case with a similar trademark is significantly preferred for consumers, the defendant can be rejected the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts since it is sufficiently recognized that the original body of this case with a similar trademark is in violation of the Trademark Act.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant, as a wholesaler, dealt with the original body with which a fake trademark is attached, and attempted to destroy evidence, such as eliminating the contents of a mobile phone text message in which the photograph on which a fake trademark is attached is stored, in order to reduce punishment during the investigation process, the Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing seems to be too uneasible, and the sentence is to be imposed after the sentence of the lower judgment to the trial.

arrow