1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning for this part of the basic facts is that of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff is operating the entertainment tavern of this case as it is, by acquiring all facilities within the trade name and the main store from the defendant and taking over the right to lease of the building of this case. The transfer contract of this case constitutes "transfer of business" under Article 41 of the Commercial Act.

According to Article 41 of the Commercial Act, the transfer of business is prohibited from running the same type of business in the same Special Metropolitan City, Metropolitan City, Si, Gun, and neighboring Special Metropolitan City, Metropolitan City, Si, and Gun for ten years, unless otherwise agreed, and the defendant, the transferor of business, in violation of the duty of prohibition of competitive business as above, operates the same type of entertainment tavern in an area adjacent to the entertainment tavern of this case. Thus, the defendant is obliged to pay 20 million won to the plaintiff for consolation money due to the violation of the duty of prohibition

3. Determination

A. The business referred to in Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act refers to a functional asset as an organic integration organized for a certain business purpose. The term "functional asset as an organic integration" refers to a functional asset which functions as a source of profit by systematically combining tangible and intangible property and facts with economic value, and the functional asset as a source of profit that is systematically combined with such a fact-finding function as a source of profit becomes an object of transaction like one goods. Thus, the issue of whether a business transfer may be deemed to have been made should be determined depending on whether the transferee continues to engage in the business activity such as the transferor after being transferred a functional asset as the source of profit that is systematically organized.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da89722 Decided April 11, 2008, etc.). B.

Modern, Basic Facts, A.