손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 9, and there is no counter-proof otherwise:
The defendant operated a restaurant specializing in the chillass, such as the chills and blades, with the trade name of "D" in the City of Speaker's Government.
On November 6, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with the Defendant and the Defendant to transfer the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million to KRW 30 million (hereinafter “instant contract”) with respect to the said restaurant leased from the owner E, including facilities and goodwill, including a cooling house, etc. in which the Defendant and the Defendant leased KRW 1.2 million, and paid the Defendant the said deposit amount of KRW 30 million by no later than the 26th of the same month.
B. The Plaintiff opened a restaurant with the name of “F” around December 3, 2017, where the Defendant’s restaurant was located, at the same place where the Defendant’s restaurant was located.
However, from February 2018, the Defendant began to operate a restaurant with the trade name of “D” at a place where approximately 20 meters away from the Plaintiff’s above restaurant, and thereafter, the Defendant changed and continued to operate the restaurant with the same cryp as “G” according to the Plaintiff’s claim.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. (1) The judgment on the Plaintiff’s primary argument (1) is based on the agreement that part of the customers who found the Defendant’s restaurant would find the Plaintiff’s restaurant, under the agreement that the Plaintiff and the Defendant would receive KRW 30 million, on the ground that the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s restaurant are common points that the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s restaurant clickers and the Defendant’s restaurant clickers are all visible, at the time of concluding the instant agreement.
In addition, the defendant, at the time of the contract of this case, said that the plaintiff " will have only a restaurant on the grounds of objection and health of the children", at least the defendant opened and operated the same restaurant at a place adjacent to the plaintiff's restaurant.