logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.07.09 2014가합3696
경업금지 등
Text

1. The Defendant shall not conduct a coffee shop business until February 10, 2024 in the area of Pakistan.

2. The plaintiff's remainder.

Reasons

1. Fact-finding 1) Purchase amount: 22 million won (Premium: KRW 12 million; KRW 10 million; KRW 10 million): TV 1, air conditioners; two air conditioners; one air conditioners; one electronic bond; and other expendable goods, etc.;

A. On February 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to acquire “F” (hereinafter “instant coffee shop”) located in E (hereinafter “instant contract”). The main contents thereof are as follows.

B. On February 7, 2014, the Plaintiff paid 2 million won the down payment to the Defendant on the date of entering into the instant contract, and paid 20 million won the remainder on February 7, 2014. On February 10, 2014, the Plaintiff commenced the business of selling coffee, etc. using the facilities, such as the existing telephone number, trade name, signboards, and fixtures, of the instant coffee shop, upon receiving the delivery of the instant coffee shop from the Defendant.

C. On May 1, 2014, the Defendant opened a restaurant with the trade name “D” in the instant coffee shop at approximately 200 meters away from May 1, 2014, and then closed the restaurant on January 12, 2015 after changing the trade name to “G”.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3-8 (Evidence No. 5 (Contract) is presumed to have established the authenticity of the entire document because there is no dispute over the part of the defendant's signature. The defendant asserts that part of the above contract was modified, but no evidence exists to acknowledge it], Eul evidence Nos. 1-5 or video, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The plaintiff's contract of this case constitutes a transfer of business under the Commercial Act, and the defendant bears the duty of prohibiting competitive business under Article 41 (1) of the Commercial Act.

However, since the Defendant operated the “D” at a place less than approximately 200 meters away from the instant coffee shop, the Defendant breached its duty to prohibit competition.

Therefore, the defendant should not conduct the coffee shop business until February 10, 2024, which was ten years after the date of transfer of business at the Pju City.

arrow