logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.09.29 2015가합110684
경업금지 등 청구의 소
Text

1. The defendant shall not engage in singing business until September 23, 2025 in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and Gangseo-gu areas.

Reasons

Basic Facts

Around August 2015, the Defendant: (a) operated the instant singing room located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E (hereinafter referred to as “Foman Card”); (b) entered into a contract on the transfer of the instant singing room’s facilities and operation rights (hereinafter referred to as “instant transfer contract”); and (c) delivered the instant singing room to the Plaintiff on September 23, 2015.

On September 23, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with G, a lessor, for the instant singing room, and commenced its business after completing the registration of the proprietor on September 25, 2015.

On the other hand, on October 6, 2015, the Defendant entered into a contract with the operator and the Defendant to acquire the right to operate the facilities and the right to operate the said facilities and the instant facilities in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, for KRW 50 million, and started business after completing business registration on October 13, 2015.

The distance between the instant singing room and the Dnonode room is about 650 meters.

The plaintiff filed an application with the Seoul Southern District Court for provisional injunction against the defendant against the above Dr. Dr. Dr., (Seoul Southern District Court 2015Kahap20381), and the above court rendered a provisional injunction on February 26, 2016, stating that "the defendant shall not operate a singing practice room business in Seoul Special Metropolitan City until the main decision is finalized."

On March 24, 2016, the defendant transferred the above D's rights to H to KRW 28.5 million and transferred the above D's rights to H. The defendant transferred the D's rights to the D's.

[Based on the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 7, Gap evidence 12, Eul evidence 12, Eul evidence 7, Eul evidence 10-1 and Eul evidence 10-2, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff 1, the defendant, as a transferor of business, bears the duty of prohibition of competition under Article 41 (1) of the Commercial Act, but violated the obligation of prohibition of competition by singing in the instant singing room and 650 meters away from the plaintiff's sales, so the plaintiff's claim for prohibition of competition and discontinuation of business, and at the same time, 20 million won as property compensation due to the decrease in the plaintiff's sales.

arrow