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

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

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B is a licensed real estate agent running the “D brokerage office”, and Defendant C is a broker assistant of the said brokerage office, and Defendant Korea Licensed Real Estate Agent Association (hereinafter “Defendant Association”) is an insurer under the Licensed Real Estate Agent Act that guarantees the liability of a licensed real estate agent for damages to the customer when acting as a broker.

B. On December 13, 2013, the Plaintiff, a licensed real estate agent, purchased No. 219 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) of the second floor moving to the building E and three parcels F (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) from Yongsan-gu, Busan-gu, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate on the 26th day of the same month.

C. From January 18, 2014, the Plaintiff engaged in the cosmetic business in the instant real estate, on the ground that G operating the cosmetic business in the instant commercial building No. 201-1 of mobile 201 provides for the restriction on the category of business in the management rules of the instant commercial building, the Plaintiff filed an application for provisional injunction against the Plaintiff.

The court rendered a decision that the Plaintiff should not continue the beauty room business on the instant real estate (the High Court Decision 2014Kahap59 dated May 12, 2014). The court rendered an indirect compulsory enforcement order that the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 1 million per day of the violation when the Plaintiff violated the obligation not to continue the beauty room business (the High Court Decision 2014Kahap59 dated May 12, 201).

(Order of indirect compulsory enforcement of H on July 10, 2017) J. D.

After that, among the management rules of the commercial building of this case, the restriction on the category of business was modified or abolished.

Accordingly, the decision of provisional injunction against interference with business against the plaintiff was revoked (the decision of provisional injunction 2014Kahap175 dated June 18, 2015, which was rendered against the defendant). The decision of provisional injunction against interference with business against the plaintiff was also made on the real estate in this case from July 18, 2014 to June 22, 2015.