1. The plaintiff's claim that was changed in exchange in this court is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On November 4, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) on the condition that the building F-dong in the name of the Plaintiff is KRW 50 million in lease deposit, KRW 3 million in monthly rent ( KRW 4 million in lease since one year), and KRW 50 million in lease term from November 5, 2015 to KRW 36 months in lease term (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). On the lower end of the said lease agreement, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), stating that “small, large, large, and painting parts” are “small, large, and painting parts.”

B. From March 2016, the Plaintiff completed business registration with G as the trade name, and operated the comprehensive automobile maintenance business with respect to the sales and painting field from the leased object.

C. Meanwhile, before the Plaintiff entered into the above lease agreement, the Defendants concluded a lease agreement on each part of the buildings in operation on racing-si from E Co., Ltd., and operated the comprehensive automobile maintenance business, while operating the entire automobile maintenance business.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 and Eul evidence No. 3 (including branch numbers for those with serial numbers) and the purpose of the entire pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into the instant lease agreement with E, while engaging in exclusively the business of selling and painting parts of the automobile maintenance business. At the time of entering into the instant lease agreement, the Defendants are engaged in the business of checking large automobiles and manufacturing wing wing wing sing. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendants were exclusively engaged in each of the above business fields.

However, the Defendants, as seen above, committed an unlawful act that infringes upon the Plaintiff’s rights under the instant lease agreement, even though they are well aware that the sales and painting sector constitutes the Plaintiff’s exclusive business scope.

Therefore, the defendants shall compensate the plaintiff for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the above tort.