The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and imprisonment with prison labor for one and half years.

except that this shall not apply.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the Defendants is improper because each sentence (10 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the Defendants A and one year and six months of imprisonment for the Defendants B) declared by the lower court against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. The grounds for appeal shall be considered ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal.

The facts charged of this case are as follows: (a) infringement of trademark rights was committed by selling or keeping in custody the letters containing a trademark identical or similar to the registered trademark of the trademark holder; (b) where several trademark infringement acts under Article 93 of the Trademark Act were continued with respect to several registered trademarks, one crime is established by combining each trademark holder and each trademark holder, and barring any special circumstance, one crime is not established by combining several trademark infringement acts different from the registered trademark on the ground that the trademark holder and the trademark are identical.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do10759, Jul. 14, 2011). Therefore, several acts of infringement of trademark rights different from the Defendants’ registered trademarks constitute concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, the lower court deemed the Defendants to have committed a crime of violating the Trademark Act as an inclusive crime, and thus, it cannot be maintained as it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the number of crimes.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

A. Defendant A: each of Article 93 of the Trademark Act and choice of imprisonment

B. Defendant B: Articles 93 and 30 of the Trademark Act, and imprisonment.