채무부존재확인
1. C summary on November 12, 2013 by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff)
relating to a transfer agreement.
A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff leased 2nd floor of the D Ground Building in Ansan-si, Dong-si, and C Ga summary
The summary of the instant case to the Defendant on November 12, 2013 when conducting a room business (hereinafter “instant room”).
All business rights, including the right of lease and facilities, are to be transferred in KRW 80,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”), and according to the instant contract, the Defendant was paid KRW 10,000,000 as down payment on November 12, 2013, and KRW 70,000,000 on November 29, 2013.
B. On January 2, 2014, the Defendant (i) opened and run a business of “Frogate” (hereinafter “Frogate”) in Ansan-si and 201, and (ii) reported the closure of business on July 21, 2014.
[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1, 2 (including additional numbers), and 3, witness G's partial testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiff's assertion that this case's competition is required
The plaintiff's competition in this case is no longer operated, and the plaintiff's competition in this case
The defendant's summary of this case after the court operation
The sales have decreased.
Even if the defendant's failure to complete the management of the defendant, the defendant's summary of this case
It is not due to the operation of the room, and there was no promise such as the transfer of the list of single aggregate customers at the time of the contract of this case, and there was no deception for the defendant at the time of the contract of this case, and the defendant did not induce the defendant.
It requires payment of KRW 60,00,000 for premiums on account of the failure to implement the agreement on the transfer of the list of single aggregate customers, etc. In order to confirm that the defendant's obligation to pay damages related to the contract of this case to the plaintiff does not exist.
B. Defendant’s assertion ① The Plaintiff’s summary of this case
Although the defendant bears the duty of prohibition of competition under Article 41 (1) of the Commercial Act because all the facilities and rights are transferred to the defendant, the competition of this case is required in violation of the above duty.
After reporting the closure of the room, the plaintiff actually has opened the competition of this case.
the room shall continue.