신용카드이용대금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that for the corresponding part of the judgment, and thus, this part of the judgment is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
2. Grounds for appeal;
A. As the application for subscription to a credit card in the name of the defendant was forged by a third party, the relevant persons were subject to criminal punishment; the plaintiff did not verify the identity through telephone communications, etc. in the process of issuing the credit card; and the receipt by a third party was not made due to the failure to verify identity in the process of delivering the credit card; in this case, deeming that “the received electronic document constitutes “the case where the recipient was transmitted by a person who has justifiable grounds to believe that it was based on the will of the originator or his/her agent by the relationship with the originator or his/her agent” to constitute “the case where the received electronic document was sent by the originator due to the relationship with the originator or his/her
B. In view of the fact that the Financial Supervisory Service recently issued a credit card with an stolen authorized certificate by the Financial Supervisory Service as a result of apportionment of damages, it is unreasonable to entirely impose on the Defendant the obligation to pay the amount of the credit card use payment in question, taking into account the fact that the Plaintiff failed to properly manage the credit card delivery procedure and that the credit card actually reaches a third party who misrepresented the Defendant.
3. Determination
A. As to the validity of a credit card issuance contract, relevant laws provide for the following. The Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions (hereinafter “Electronic Documents Act”)
(2) In any of the following cases, the addressee of an electronic document may regard the expression of intent contained in the electronic document as the originator's act: