1. The defendant runs a singing business in Gwangju Metropolitan City, Dong-gu and south-gu area until March 5, 2027.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 6, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff for transferring the entertainment tavern (hereinafter “instant entertainment tavern”) under the trade name “D,” which was operated by the Defendant on the Dong-gu Seoul and the first basement level (hereinafter “D”) to KRW 50 million (i.e., lease deposit KRW 20 million) (hereinafter “instant contract”). The Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million to the Defendant under the instant contract.

B. On March 8, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with E, a lessor, on the entertainment tavern of this case, and commenced business after completing business registration on March 13, 2017.

C. On March 20, 2017, the Defendant purchased and operated an entertainment drinking club with the trade name “G” located in the Dong-gu, Gwangju and the 1st underground floor (referring to approximately 350 meters away from the walking distance from the instant entertainment drinking club; hereinafter the same shall apply). On May 18, 2017, the Defendant sold the said entertainment drinking club to H and suspended its business around that time.

On the other hand, on May 17, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application against the Defendant for provisional disposition of prohibition of competitive business by asserting that the Defendant was engaged in the same kind of business in violation of the obligation of prohibition of competitive business. On June 7, 2017, the said court rendered a decision on the following: “The Defendant shall not engage in singing-type business in Gwangju Metropolitan City or have a third party operate the same business within the Gwangju Metropolitan City until March 6, 2027.”

Accordingly, on June 30, 2017, the Defendant filed an objection against the provisional disposition order with the Gwangju District Court 2017Kahap201, but the said court decided to authorize the provisional disposition order on July 27, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion constitutes a transfer of business under the Commercial Act, and the Defendant bears the obligation to prohibit competitive business against the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 41(1) of the Commercial Act.

Nevertheless, the defendant violated it from March 20, 2017.