1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant is a funeral unit B located in Asan City D, and a funeral unit E.

1. Basic facts

A. The reasons cited in this part are as follows. In addition to adding Gap evidence Nos. 41 and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 47 to the grounds for recognition, the part of "1. Recognizing facts" is identical to the part of "1. Recognizing facts" of the court of first instance. Thus, the corresponding part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Highly, “K for the Chairperson of the Defendant Merchant Association” in the third 20th 20th e.g., the first e., the second e.g., the Defendant Merchant Association’s Chairperson.

The defendant C, each of the 5, 7, 10, 12, 14, 15, and 16 of the first instance court's decision, shall be reversed to "C".

From December 9, 2016, the first instance court’s decision Nos. 7 to 8, “Defendant C began funeral services on the instant site from December 9, 2016.”

From December 9, 2016 to December 9, 2016, “C is engaged in the business of drying fish in the instant location, and as a result, the Plaintiff is unable to conduct the five-day street store business in the instant location from December 9, 2016 to December 9, 2016.” The fourth-party 21 to 5-party 7 of the first instance judgment is as follows.

1) On April 3, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with C from December 9, 2016 on the charge that he/she obstructed the Plaintiff’s business operation in the instant location by having C operate his/her business in the instant location. On July 24, 2017, the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office filed a complaint against the said Defendant on the charge of interference with the Plaintiff’s business operation. On July 24, 2017, the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office filed a complaint with C on the charge of interference with the Plaintiff’s business operation in the instant location (a disposition of inconsistency with evidence, and the Plaintiff filed a complaint with respect to the said disposition, and Daejeon High Public Prosecutor’s Office ordered re-investigation on the instant case.

On April 25, 2018, the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office has recognized N, L, and T in accordance with the results of the re-investigation on April 25, 2018 and imposed a fine of KRW 1 million on N, L, and T, and KRW 700,000 on T.