A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operates a precious metal sales store with the trade name of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “D” in C.

No one shall use a trademark identical with or similar to another person's registered trademark on goods identical with or similar to the designated goods, and deliver, sell, forge, imitate, or possess such trademark for the purpose of using or making another person use it.

On January 23, 2015, the Defendant purchased from E (Detention Prosecution 1 (3,00,000,000 won) a forged non-use trademark (3,000,000 won) with a trademark identical or similar to the French trademark registered with the Korean Intellectual Property Office (No. 0149164) on January 23, 2015, and then sold 10,000 to or from August 3, 2015 with profits of KRW 20,000,00 to its name-free customers, as described in the attached list of crimes (D, and A) from E to July 9, 2015, the Defendant infringed upon the trademark right of precious metals, etc. from the above E more than 53 times in total, by purchasing it from the said E to sell it to customers with a false name or possessing it for the purpose of selling it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of statutes to E of the protocol of interrogation of each prosecutor's suspect to prosecution;

1. The relevant Article of the Trademark Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor concerning facts constituting an offense (referring to each trademark right holder's respective registered trademarks);

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The crime of violating the Trademark Act of sentencing Article 62-2 of the Social Services and the Criminal Act requires that the defendant be punished for strict punishment in light of the fact that the crime is not less complicated than the nature of the crime by infringing the right of the registered trademark right holder and significantly disturbing the order in the product market, and the quantity and type of counterfeit goods kept and sold by the defendant.

(b).