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. On August 2016, Defendant B entered into a business transfer agreement with the Plaintiff on the transfer of the instant restaurant at KRW 53 million (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Plaintiff, after completing business registration under the name of Defendant C, who is an son, and operating a mutually named restaurant (hereinafter “E”) in the Dong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

B. Pursuant to the instant contract, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 10 million to Defendant C’s deposit account on August 10, 2016, and KRW 33 million on August 26, 2016, respectively. Around that time, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to Defendant B, succeeding to the lessee status of the said restaurant building, the employment contract relationship between the employees, and continued to operate the restaurant with the same name upon taking over all the facilities, etc. of the instant restaurant.

C. After about 10 months, Defendant B began to operate a restaurant with the trade name of “G” (hereinafter “G”), after completing business registration under the name of Nonparty F in the building part of the instant restaurant. Defendant B sold food, such as ducks, original juice block, and original lebs, at the nearby restaurant of this case, while selling food, such as ducks, original lebs, and original lebs.

After the husband of the plaintiff's husband entered this port, the defendant B suspended the business of the nearby restaurant of this case and transferred the nearby restaurant of this case to another person.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Defendants asserted that the instant restaurant business was well operated, but the fact was that the Defendants, even though they were gas costs, electricity charges, water taxes, monthly taxes, monthly taxes, and food materials debts, deceiving the Plaintiff as to the operating situation of the instant restaurant by receiving premium from the Plaintiff, and paying the debt, etc., and, even though they were liable for the duty not to engage in competitive business under the Commercial Act according to the instant contract constituting a transfer of business, the Defendants opened a nearby restaurant and run the same kind of business.