2. The defendant is Seoul.

A. The Defendant is a person who operated the beauty art room ( approximately 15 square meters; hereinafter “the beauty art room of this case”) in the trade name “F” by leasing No. 114, 105-1, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

B. On May 22, 2015, the Defendant transferred the instant beauty art room to the Plaintiff. At that time, the Plaintiff concluded a new lease contract with the lessor of the instant beauty art room, and separately paid the lessor the lease deposit amounting to KRW 30 million,000,000,000 to the Defendant as premium for the beauty art room of this case on May 22, 2015, and on June 1, 2015, KRW 60,000,000,000,000,000 won was paid to the Defendant.

C. The Plaintiff took over 2,358 customer lists and 6,219,303 points from the Defendant, and took over all the trade name, signboards, telephone numbers, and other equipment of the cosmetic and used them as it is without changing them. The Plaintiff operated the cosmetic of this case.

around June 25, 2015, the Defendant opened and operated a new beauty art room with the trade name of approximately 3 km away from the instant beauty art room C and 201 “D.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 7, purport of whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant transferred the cosmetic business of this case to the Plaintiff, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to prohibit competition pursuant to Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act.

However, the Defendant violated the duty of prohibition of competitive business as it operated the beauty art room with the trade name “D” at a place less than about 3 km from the beauty art room of this case.

Therefore, the defendant shall not operate the beauty room business until June 1, 2025, which is ten years after the date of transfer of business in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and shall not operate the beauty room business. The defendant is obligated to discontinue the business of "D". The defendant is obligated to compensate for damages for mental suffering suffered by the plaintiff due to the violation of the defendant's duty of prohibition of competitive business.

(b) judgment;