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

Around February 4, 2013, the Defendant joined the Plaintiff Company as an agent in career service and promoted the Plaintiff Company as the head of the trade team around March 2015, and around May 4, 2016, the Plaintiff retired (AA 16) from office (the Defendant expressed his/her intention of retirement to the Plaintiff Company around April 4, 2016), and refer to Article 660(1) and (2) of the Civil Act (see Article 660(1) of the Civil Act (see Article 660(2) of the instant employment contract under the first employment contract).

(i) around June 2016, C&D is employed as the representative of the domestic office of C&D.

The Plaintiff received e-mail from C company around June 13, 2016. Its content terminated the transfer contract with the Plaintiff as of June 13, 2016, and in the future, C company established a domestic office and directly performed the duties of the Plaintiff, and the representative of the domestic office was the Defendant.

On the same day, the defendant sent e-mail to the plaintiff's domestic customers, and then Cratians, not the plaintiff, conduct direct transactions with the customers, and Cratians, the representative of Crat's domestic office opened transactions, such as informing the contents of coffee price chain.

[Grounds for recognition] A-17, B-1-8, each fact-finding result, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Defendant’s duty to refrain from the competition (including the duty of prohibition of transaction and prohibition of concurrent office) was promoted to the trade team leader of the Plaintiff company around March 2015, and the Defendant independently performed the relevant business, such as the overall business of the trade team and, in particular, determination of sales prices of coffees and coffees with C, and management of all domestic business entities. The Defendant is the trade team leader of the Plaintiff company, the business owner.