1. Defendant B shall not run the billiard business until November 30, 2025 in Gyeyang-gu, Bupyeong-gu, and Seo-gu, Incheon.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 25, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract on the premium for a commercial building lease (hereinafter “instant contract”) that takes over the business of “E” on the third floor of the building in Gyeyang-gu Incheon, Incheon (hereinafter “E”) from Defendant B to KRW 56,000,000 for the premium, and paid to Defendant B KRW 6,000,000 for the same day.

B. On December 1, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with F, G, and lease deposit amount of KRW 25,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,700,000 (excluding value-added tax), which is the owner of the building in the instant party site, and operates the instant party hall in the said commercial building.

C. On December 15, 2017, Defendant C, the wife of Defendant B, entered into a lease agreement of KRW 50,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,400,00 with respect to the Incheon Gyeyang-gu I and the second floor, which was 70 meters away from H and the head of the Gu of this case from the head of the Dong of this case. Defendant C, the wife of Defendant B, entered into a lease agreement of KRW 50,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,400,000, and registered the business in the above commercial as “J” (hereinafter

On January 22, 2019, Defendant C filed a report on the closure of the above billiard business on December 31, 2018, and Defendant C filed a registration of the business with the content that Defendant B’s East K was operating the same trade name at the same place on January 1, 2019.

E. L transferred L, February 28, 2019, to M in 250,000 premium amounting to KRW 250,000 for premiums.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 (including each number), Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. Defendant B is the transferor of the party headquarters business in this case under the contract in this case and bears the duty of prohibition of competitive business against the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act. Thus, Defendant B is obligated not to run the party headquarters business in Incheon Gyeyang-gu and its neighboring Bupyeong-gu and Seo-gu with the party headquarters in this case. 2) Defendant B’s violation of the duty of prohibition of competitive business under the contract in this case by Defendant B. 56,00.