1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. From around 2009, the Defendant operated a restaurant that mainly sells scamblings with the trade name “F” at the first floor store in the building E (hereinafter “instant store”) located in the racing city (hereinafter “instant previous restaurant”).

B. On August 4, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to transfer and take over internal facilities and equipment (postd facilities, cooling pipes, air conditioners, tables, and kitchen equipment) in the instant store at KRW 38,00,00 (hereinafter “instant contract”) and then leased the said store from the owner of the instant store.

C. After that, the Plaintiff continues to engage in the restaurant business that alters the trade name from the instant store to “G” and mainly sells swine meat (hereinafter “instant restaurant”).

On the other hand, from November 2013, the defendant is running the restaurant business mainly selling pigs in the name of "Dcafeteria" in the name of "Dcafeteria."

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion constitutes a transfer of business under the Commercial Act, and the Defendant bears the duty of prohibition of competitive business for ten years pursuant to Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act. The Defendant, in violation of this provision, sells food of the same kind as the food sold in the instant restaurant while operating a “Dcafeteria” at a place less than approximately 150 to 200 meters away from the instant restaurant, and thereby, operates the same kind of food in the same way as the food sold in the instant restaurant, and the Plaintiff suffered a large

Therefore, the Defendant shall not operate a restaurant selling meat in the racing area where the instant restaurant is located until July 31, 2023, pursuant to Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act, and the Defendant is obligated to close the business of “Dcafeteria” in violation thereof, and the Plaintiff is obligated to do so.