1. The defendant,

가. 원고에게 별지 목록1. 기재 각 부동산 별지 도면 ㉠, ㉡, ㉢, ㉣, ㉠의 각 점을...

1. Facts of recognition;

가. 원고는 2012. 3. 18. C에게 별지 목록1. 기재 각 부동산[별지 도면 ㉠, ㉡, ㉢, ㉣, ㉠의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 (가) 부분 105.94㎡]을 임대차보증금 3,500만 원, 월차임 150만 원, 기간 2012. 3. 18.부터 2014. 3. 18.까지로 정하여 임대하였고, C는 그 무렵부터 위 곳에서 수퍼마켓(이하 ‘이 사건 수퍼마켓’이라 한다)을 운영하였다.

B. However, on March 22, 2014, C transferred all of the instant facilities, goodwill, and lease deposits to the Defendant at KRW 127 million. Since around that time, the Defendant acquired and operated the instant veterinary market. The Plaintiff’s consent regarding the transfer of the instant veterinary market was not written.

C. On the other hand, the Defendant, around April 2014, leases the real estate listed in the separate sheet 2, adjacent to the Simarket, and operates a supermarket business in the part of the ship (B) that connects each point of the following points, i.e., the base value for the drawings, e.g., military records, military records, military units of war, wrap, wrap, w

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including paper numbers)

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the defendant illegally occupied the supermarket of this case as an unauthorized assignee of the supermarket of this case.

As such, the plaintiff is obligated to order the supermarket.

B. It is reasonable to view that the owner of a business prohibition claim agrees to allow the buyer of a shop, the transferee of his position, or the lessee of the shop to perform the duty of restrictions on the type of business agreed upon in the sales contract, etc. in the mutual relation to the shop occupants, barring any special circumstance. Thus, it shall be deemed that the owner of a business prohibition claim has a duty of complying with the mutual agreement on the restriction on the type of business. Accordingly, the transferee and lessee of the position of the shop buyer and lessee, etc.