1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant: (a) imported laundry equipment from the U.S. C company to sell it to a domestic monopoly; (b) sold laundry equipment, and (c) allowed the buyer to use the trade name “D” of the Defendant’s registration; and (c) the buyer’s brand “C” of laundry equipment in operation was difficult to indicate the brand “C

B. On December 1, 2006, the Defendant sold C laundry equipment to the Plaintiff at 4,6180,000 won.

At the time, the Defendant’s employee E stated in the “laundry Equipment Purchase Contract” with the permission of the Defendant’s representative director, the phrase “I have the right to guarantee the business district of 1 km (hereinafter “instant agreement”) for the first place in which the Plaintiff is in charge of, and affixed the official seal of the Defendant’s representative director.”

Around that time, the Plaintiff started an accelerator business in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as soon as possible with the original trade name called “F”, not “D” trade name.

However, the defendant published the plaintiff's promptly on the defendant's Internet homepage as "D funeral store".

C. On November 201, 2013, the Defendant sold the dried machine to the Corro bank (mutual I; hereinafter referred to as “redro bank No. 1”) opened by H in-house directors of the Defendant Company by September 1, 2013, at a place less than 800 meters away from the Plaintiff’s promptly as soon as possible, and again sold the laundry equipment by business partnership with the Maro bank (mutualJ; hereinafter referred to as “FI”) located as soon as 600 meters away from the radius of July 2014.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 7, 9, 10, Eul evidence 5, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 1, 2 and 3 (including each number), witness E, and H's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant had H, a director of the defendant's in-house, set up the first place as soon as possible, and set up the second place as soon as possible in the manner of joint start-up with the laundry business, "J". The defendant violated the agreement of this case and violated the agreement of this case.