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

A. The plaintiff and the defendant are corporations operating alcoholic beverage sales business.

B. On November 10, 201, C joined the Plaintiff Company and then retired from the Plaintiff Company on July 201, 201, and thereafter started working as an employee of the Defendant Company.

C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff is a member of the Gyeonggi-do Branch and the Defendant’s respective local comprehensive liquor wholesale business associations in Seoul, and the part related to the instant case in relation to the “Operational Rules for Seoul Metropolitan Area Trade (hereinafter “Operation Rules”) adopted by the Seoul, the Gyeonggi-do Branch, the Gyeonggi-do Branch, and the Incheon Local Comprehensive Alcoholic Beverages Wholesale Association.”

Article 7 (Interference with Business Activities, etc.) The principle of prior transaction system shall apply mutatis mutandis to business places in which members are engaged in transactions.

(1) If an enterpriser employs human resources of a transacting partner as an act of unfairly attracting human resources in the same category of business and impairing a customer, an employee who has moved his/her place of business shall not be entitled to secure a customer of the former place of business for two years from the date on which the cause of departure from employment occurred.

(5) Matters dealt with by mutual agreement between a damaged member company and a damaged member company shall not be deemed interference with business activities.

Provided, That if the conditions of mutual agreement are the compensation for the support equipment of the existing trader, less than three years from the date of production shall be compensated for the new goods in cash, and in principle, 10% reduction shall be applied whenever one year elapses after the lapse of three years, and if the former member demands the issuance of the tax invoice, the damaged member shall issue the tax invoice.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion in collusion with C, the defendant deducteds information on the details of transaction partners and sales status of the plaintiff's trade secret. Accordingly, the plaintiff's existing transaction partners discontinue transactions with the plaintiff and make transactions with the defendant.