A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Seized evidence 3 through 13 shall be confiscated.

Punishment of the crime

On February 6, 2015, the Defendant: (a) supplied 3,600 marks (LUIS VUITN) on the walled 3,600 marks (2,80,000 won at the fixed market price) on the walled 3,60 marks attached, which are the same and similar to the “LUIS VITON” and registered with the Korean Intellectual Property Office as the walled Sheet of counterfeit goods in front of E’s container storage in Gwangju-si; and (b) sold them to the unretailed retail.

Accordingly, the defendant infringed the trademark right of the above trademark right holder.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Statement made by each prosecutor to E;

1. Investigation report (verification of the market price of counterfeit goods sold by the person under investigation), investigation report (verification of compliance between the delivery address of forged goods and the address of the station where the suspect's cell phone was sent), investigation report (report attaching photographs, such as luxa luxa, etc. attached to a fake trademark), investigation report (verification of the fact of trademark registration), investigation report (report on the fact of trademark registration), and investigation report (Attachment of text messages A and informant E);

1. Letters, copies, notes, receipts of resident registration certificates;

1. Application of the statutes on seizure records and list of seized articles;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Article 93 of the Trademark Act regarding criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 97-2 (1) of the Confiscation Trademark Act asserted that the defendant, through the introduction of F, only connected a person who will purchase counterfeit trademark products ("G") to E, and that there was no fact that he purchased counterfeit goods from E.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence in the above holding, i.e., (i) the prosecutorial office made a statement on the person who sold counterfeit goods, and (ii) the reason why he sold the goods to the defendant, the quantity of the goods sold, the situation at the time, and (iii) the resident registration certificate of the defendant if E does not sell counterfeit goods to the defendant.