A. The Plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of manufacturing and processing of paper shopping bags, etc., and the Defendant has manufactured shopping bags, etc. in Jeonju City with the trade name “C”.

B. On March 8, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the transfer of factory facilities (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the content that the Plaintiff shall take over all of the manufacturing machinery and equipment of shopping bags located in the Defendant’s business establishment (hereinafter “instant machinery”) and be subject to transfer of shopping bags (hereinafter “instant contract”) by determining the total contract amount as KRW 220 million (including value-added tax).

C. The contract of this case contains the following special terms and conditions:

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant special agreement”). Article 10 (Other sellers (the Defendant) does not engage in the same kind of business as shopping bags within the jurisdiction of Jeollabuk-do after the conclusion of the contract, and if a business is conducted within the jurisdiction of Jeollabuk-do for the same kind of business, it shall be deemed as a breach of contract and shall be paid 1.5 times the contract amount as penalty (hereinafter referred to as the “instant penalty”).

On July 9, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 220 million to the Defendant the contract price of this case. Accordingly, the Defendant delivered all of the instant machines to the Plaintiff around that time. D, the Defendant’s son, also, was in accordance with the instant contract, from July 2, 2018 to July 2, 2018.

9. By 30.0, the Plaintiff transferred the production technology of shopping bags using the instant machines to the Plaintiff.

E. However, after delivering the instant machine to the Plaintiff, the Defendant engaged in the manufacturing and selling of shopping bags with the same trade name as the previous one from the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government around the time of the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, 7 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Defendant’s prohibition of competitive business.