1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

가. 피고는 C로부터 부산 부산진구 D 1층 한칸 안쪽을 임차하여 ‘E’라는 상호로 돌솥밥 전문 음식점(이하 ‘이 사건 식당’이라 한다) 영업을 하고 있었는데, 2017. 5. 12. 원고로부터 75,000,000원을 지급받고 원고에게 이 사건 식당의 영업을 양도하여 주었다.

B. On May 12, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with C and the instant restaurant, setting the lease term of KRW 30,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,500,000, and from May 13, 2017 to May 12, 2019, and continues to use the trade name “E” in the instant restaurant until now.

다. 피고는 2017. 7.경 부산 동구 F에서 ‘G’이라는 상호로 돌솥밥 전문 음식점의 영업을 개시하였다.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 and 2, Gap evidence 3-1 to 3, and evidence 4-1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Pursuant to Article 41 of the Commercial Act, the Defendant is obligated to prohibit competitive business not operating the same kind of business in Busan Metropolitan City, which is the same location as the instant restaurant for ten years.

However, in violation of the duty of prohibition of competitive business, the Defendant commenced the business of a restaurant selling the same food in the vicinity of the instant restaurant. Accordingly, the Plaintiff suffered from the loss of sales and the mental suffering therefrom, and thus, the Defendant is liable for compensating the Plaintiff for damages, instead of 10 years for the restaurant business that commenced the business.

3. Determination

A. The fact that the Defendant transferred the instant restaurant business to the Plaintiff on May 12, 2017 is as seen earlier. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to prohibit competitive business not conducting the same kind of business in Busan Metropolitan City, which is the same Metropolitan City, for ten years, unless there are special circumstances pursuant to Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act.

B. The defendant does not carry on the same kind of business with the plaintiff only within the Hedong in Busan-gu.