logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원영덕지원 2017.05.23 2016가단5271
영업금지청구
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 5, 2012, the Plaintiff purchased all the equipment of a restaurant operated by the Defendant with the trade name “D” from the Defendant in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Inc. (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) for KRW 39 million, and transferred the said KRW 39 million to the Plaintiff on November 5, 2012.

B. Since then, the Plaintiff is running a restaurant business by changing the trade name to “E”.

C. On December 4, 2012, the Defendant reported the closure of the restaurant in this case.

On December 4, 2014, the defendant reported food service business to the head of Ulsan-gun on December 4, 201, and operated a restaurant with the trade name "D" from the Ulsan-gun F.

E. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant's restaurant business, such as the above paragraph (d), constituted a violation of the obligation not to engage in competitive business under the Commercial Act against the defendant in the Young-gu District Court, and filed an application for provisional injunction against the defendant to prohibit the defendant's business.

(2016Kahap1018). The court dismissed the above application on February 10, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 5 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant transferred the instant restaurant business to the Plaintiff, and thus, the Plaintiff is obligated to prohibit competitive business pursuant to Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act.

Nevertheless, the Defendant violated the duty of prohibition of competitive business by running the same business as the Plaintiff in the Gyeongjin-gun F, the neighboring area of the instant building. Accordingly, the Plaintiff suffered operating loss equivalent to KRW 33,419,455.

Therefore, the defendant is not obliged to engage in food service business for ten years in the Gyeongjin-gun, the same administrative district as the restaurant operated by the plaintiff, and is obliged to pay damages of KRW 33,419,455 to the plaintiff.

3. Business transfer under the Commercial Act of the judgment is an enterprise organized for a certain business purpose, that is, human and material.

arrow