Facts: The issue started when defendant was alleged to wrongfully discharge the plaintiff who had been employed by the defendant for an indefinite time, admitting that he discharged the plaintiff without written advice, however, asserting that such discharge is lawful on account of absence and disobedience of the plaintiff. The previous judgment was in favor of the plaintiff; hence, the defendant now seeks an appeal. The defendant asserts that in their contract, the petitioner cannot enter into an employment within five years after the termination of their agreement. However, it is discovered that the plaintiff has contracted another employment, hence, violating their agreement. Issue: Whether or not the right of the plaintiff to enter into contract can be restrained and such agreement is against public policy