1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant B operated the restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) under the trade name “E” in Jincheon-gun, Jincheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and concluded a contract on July 31, 2016, which transferred the instant restaurant business to the Plaintiff in KRW 70,000,000 for the premium of KRW 70,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

The scope of transfer of the instant contract is stipulated as “the entire facility (see attached documents) and technical transfer”. The separate entry in the instant contract is as shown in the attached Form of this judgment.

B. The Defendants, around March 1, 2017, operated a restaurant with the trade name “G” in the name of Defendant C, Defendant C, his/her father, around 10km away from the restaurant of this case, and continued to operate his/her business until now by changing the name “H” and “I” to “H” upon raising an objection.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 8, 10, 11 (including branch numbers for those with a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, 2, 5 through 7, 9, 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. 1) The Defendants asserted as the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim are prohibited from engaging in the same kind of business in the same Special Metropolitan City, Metropolitan City, Si, Gun, and neighboring Special Metropolitan City, Metropolitan City, Si, or Gun for ten years unless otherwise agreed in the case of transfer of business under the instant contract and Article 41 of the Commercial Act (Prohibition of Competitive Business by Transferor).