>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
People v. Wu Jun (case of selling commodities with counterfeited registered trademarks)
吴军销售假冒注册商标的商品案
【法宝引证码】
*尊敬的用户,您好!本篇仅为该案例的英文摘要。北大法宝提供单独的翻译服务,如需整篇翻译,请发邮件至database@chinalawinfo.com,或致电86 (10) 8268-9699进行咨询。
*Dear user, this document contains only a summary of the respective judicial case. To request a full-text translation as an additional service, please contact us at:  + 86 (10) 8268-9699 database@chinalawinfo.com

People v. Wu Jun (case of selling commodities with counterfeited registered trademarks)
(case of selling commodities with counterfeited registered trademarks)
吴军销售假冒注册商标的商品案
[Key Terms]
crime of selling commodities with counterfeited registered trademarks ; huge amount ; repentance ; probation
[核心术语]
销售假冒注册商标的商品罪;数额巨大;认罪;缓刑
[Disputed Issues]

Where any person knowingly sells a huge amount of products with counterfeited registered trademarks, such act constitutes the crime of selling commodities with counterfeited registered trademarks.
[争议焦点]
1.销售明知是假冒注册商标的商品,数额巨大,构成销售假冒注册商标的商品罪
[Case Summary]

Where any person knowingly sells a huge amount of products with counterfeited registered trademarks and the value of goods that have not been sold is relatively large such act constitutes the crime of selling commodities with counterfeited registered trademarks and the criminal liability shall be investigated for in accordance with the law. Meanwhile in the court hearing...
[案例要旨]
销售明知是假冒注册商标的商品数额巨大且尚未销售的货值金额较大。其行为已构成销售假冒注册商标的商品罪依法应当追究刑事责任。同时...

Full-text omitted.

 

吴军销售假冒注册商标的商品案

 安徽省合肥市中级人民法院
 刑事裁定书
 (2015)合刑终字第00320号
 原公诉机关合肥高新技术产业开发区人民检察院。
 上诉人(原审被告人)吴军,个体户。因涉嫌犯销售假冒注册商标的商品罪于2014年8月20日被合肥市公安局蜀山分局刑事拘留,同年9月26日被合肥高新技术产业开发区人民检察院批准逮捕,同日由合肥市公安局蜀山分局执行逮捕。现羁押于庐江县看守所。
 辩护人赵彪,安徽百商律师事务所律师。
 合肥高新技术产业开发区人民法院审理合肥高新技术产业开发区人民检察院指控原审被告人吴军犯销售假冒注册商标的商品罪一案,于2015年6月1日作出(2015)合高新刑初字第00097号刑事判决。原审被告人吴军不服,提出上诉。本院依法组成合议庭,公开开庭审理了本案。合肥市人民检察院指派检察员黄莉出庭履行职务,上诉人(原审被告人)吴军及其辩护人赵彪到庭参加诉讼。本案现已审理终结。
 原判认定:第4581865号钩图形、第3921767号“adidas及图形”、第175152号“NEWBALANCE”、第175153号“NB”均为经中华人民共和国国家工商行政管理总局商标局核准注册的商标,且在注册商标有效期内。
 自2013年4月开始,被告人吴军通过阿里巴巴网站找到名为福建莆田步凡店、晴鞋业、NB贸易、大世界的供货商,从上述店铺购买假冒第4581865号钩图形、第3921767号“adidas及图形”、第175152号“NEWBALANCE”、第175153号“NB”注册商标运动鞋,然后通过微信和QQ向他人销售,其中,向汪某、刘某乙、刘某甲(均另案处理)等9人销售假冒注册商标的运动鞋按照被告人供述、证人证言以及支付宝某
 为方便销售,吴军将假冒注册商标的运动鞋存放在位于合肥市瑶海区站塘路万福家园10幢619室的住处,以及租用的位于站塘路七里塘镇卫庄村民组26号的仓库。2014年8月19日,公安机关在站塘路附近将正在交易的被告人吴军现场抓获,并从其住处和仓库依法扣押假冒耐克钩图形商标的运动鞋669双、假冒“adidas”运动鞋431双、假冒“NEWBALANCE”运动鞋1664双。按照查明的被告人供述、证人证言中显示的多种价格中最低的销售价格计算,未销售的货值金额共计360650元。
 另查明,经新平衡运动鞋公司授权,北京市智慧谷知识产权代理有限责任公司对公安机关扣押的带有“newbalance”、“NB”标识的商品进行抽样对比,认为扣押物品系侵害新平衡运动鞋公司商标专用权的侵权商品。经阿迪达斯体育(中国)有限公司授权,上海恒方知识产权咨询有限公司出具书面材料一份,认为经阿迪达斯体育(中国)有限公司确认,公安机关扣押的带有“adidas”及图文标识的商品系侵害阿迪达斯体育(中国)有限公司商标专用权的侵权商品。经耐克国际有限公司注册商标授权,耐克体育(中国)有限公司对公安机关扣押的标有耐克国际有限公司注册商标的产品进行抽样对比,认为扣押物品系假冒耐克国际有限公司注册商标的产品。
 一审庭审中,被告人吴军称其知道起诉书所列明品牌的商品是假的,通过自己送货、快递方式运送货物;其中,通过快递发货的货款包含运费,快递费用由对方支付,包装盒和包装袋也要单独收费。被告人吴军亦当庭陈述公安机关扣押的送货单据是其用于送货、起诉书指控的两处地点里面存放的商品归其本人所有。
 ......

Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.

1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.

2. Binding to the account with access to this database.

3. Apply for a trial account.

4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥300.00】 for your single purchase.
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese