Shulou(Shulou.com)11/24 Report--

CTOnews.com, December 19, according to the official WeChat account of the Shanghai No. 3 Intermediate people's Court, recently, the Shanghai No. 3 Intermediate people's Court (hereinafter referred to as the Shanghai Intermediate people's Court) held an online hearing on a criminal appeal case suspected of selling counterfeit "Alps Alpenliebe" registered trademark candy, and rejected the appeal and upheld the final verdict.

After hearing the crime of selling goods with counterfeit registered trademarks, the court of first instance sentenced Wu to five years' imprisonment and a fine of 2.2 million yuan. After the verdict of the first instance, Wu disagreed and appealed to the Shanghai third Intermediate people's Court.

The Shanghai No. 3 Intermediate people's Court found out that from September 2019 to December 2021, the appellant Wu Mou, without the authorization of the owner of the registered trademark of "Alps Alpenliebe", knew that the candy counterfeiting the registered trademark of "Alps Alpenliebe" was still purchased at a low price of 0.1 to 0.20 yuan each and sold in two online platform shops. After audit, Wu opened two online stores involved in the sale of fake "Alps Alpenliebe" brand goods totaling more than 4.2 million yuan.

After the trial of the third Intermediate people's Court of Shanghai, the picture held that the appellant Wu Mou sold goods that he knew were counterfeit registered trademarks in order to obtain illegal interests, and the amount of the crime had reached particularly serious circumstances. his behavior has constituted the crime of selling goods with counterfeit registered trademarks. During the second trial, the defender proposed that more than 1.3 million yuan should be deducted from the amount determined in the original judgment. After investigation, the original public prosecution organ has deducted more than 540,000 yuan from the relevant brushing amount when initiating the public prosecution, and the 1.3 million yuan does not have enough evidence to prove it, which is lack of factual basis and cannot be established. The court of first instance found that the facts of the crime were clear, the evidence was true and sufficient, the application of the law was correct, the sentencing was appropriate, and the trial procedure was legal, so it made a final ruling rejecting the appeal and upholding the original judgment.

Welcome to subscribe "Shulou Technology Information " to get latest news, interesting things and hot topics in the IT industry, and controls the hottest and latest Internet news, technology news and IT industry trends.