2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On September 24, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant was operating the “E store” operated by the Defendant from the Defendant in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City D and Cdong 117 (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) at KRW 115 million. The Defendant violated the obligation to refrain from engaging in competitive business under Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act, thereby operating a restaurant as “F store” on the second floor of the building where the instant restaurant is located from December 2015, with the trade name of “F store,” and operated the restaurant with the same trade name after moving the store to the Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City C and B 117, supra. The Plaintiff sought a prohibition of its business pursuant to Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act against the Defendant based on Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act, and the Plaintiff, by indirect compulsion, transferred the amount of money calculated by the Defendant in proportion to KRW 300,00 per day for the Defendant’s breach of the obligation of prohibition of competitive business.

In addition, the Defendant committed a tort that infringes the Plaintiff’s interest by running a restaurant in violation of the duty of prohibition of competitive business, thereby causing damages to the Plaintiff. As such, the Plaintiff seek payment of KRW 10 million as part of the amount of damages and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s assertion ① that the Defendant transferred the instant restaurant to the Plaintiff, but the instant restaurant is operated by G not by the Plaintiff, and G is a new business entity, and the Plaintiff is not entitled to seek a business prohibition against the Defendant.

In this assertion, the Defendant is understood to the purport that the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant should not be accepted, inasmuch as the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant was not accepted, while using the term “qualified as a party”, it does not constitute the principal safety defense that the Plaintiff’s lawsuit ought to be dismissed.

② After the filing of the instant lawsuit, G to a third party the restaurant in this case.