1. The defendant shall not engage in entertainment tavern business for 10 years from October 13, 2012 at the Jeonju City.

2. The plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. From December 20, 2006, the Defendant has operated an entertainment drinking house (hereinafter “instant entertainment drinking house”) with the trade name “D” in the underground space of the building located in Yansan-gu Seoul Metropolitan City from around 2006.

B. On October 13, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to take over the instant entertainment tavern in KRW 50,000,000, and paid the acquisition price to the Defendant, and began the instant entertainment tavern business from November 12, 2012. In the process, the Plaintiff received transfer of the trade name, signboard, telephone number, and the so-called copper president and musical director in the store, employees’ employment relationship, customer and customer, facilities, fixtures, etc. of the instant entertainment tavern from November 12, 2012.

C. Even after transferring the instant entertainment tavern, the Defendant served as a co-president at the instant entertainment tavern from September 25, 2013 to February 27, 2014, and thereafter, from around September 25, 2013 to around February 2014, the Defendant worked as a co-president from the “F” of the entertainment tavern in Yasan-gu, Jeonju-si.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and 8 (including provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The defendant, who transferred the plaintiff's business to the plaintiff, bears the duty of prohibition of competition for ten years from the date of business transfer pursuant to Article 41 (1) and (2) of the Commercial Act. However, the defendant is obliged to pay consolation money of 20,000,000 won to the plaintiff as compensation for mental suffering suffered by the plaintiff due to the violation of the duty of prohibition of competition.2) The defendant's defendant is obliged to work with the plaintiff F while working with the plaintiff's president at other entertainment bars, which are the same type of business as the entertainment tavern in the instant case. Accordingly, the plaintiff's sales have decreased above about 40% in comparison with the previous year, and net profits have decreased above 300,000 won per month.