beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.11.03 2020가단225910

채무부존재확인

Text

There is no obligation of each of the loans based on each installment loan listed in the attached Form against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D requested the Plaintiff to open a cell phone in the Plaintiff’s name as his bad credit holder, and the Plaintiff opened one cell phone (the phone E) to the Defendant.

B. D around March 12, 2019, by accessing the above mobile site of the Plaintiff’s residence to the Defendant mobile site, and applying for installment loans to purchase FFFFF passenger vehicle in the Plaintiff’s name as shown in attached Table 1, and by receiving a vehicle acceptance certificate and a letter of delegation for receipt of loan by e-mail, and receiving an installment loan in the Plaintiff’s name and sending it to the Defendant employee.

C. D, around April 8, 2019, purchased I rocketing car from D, the D, the D Company’s D, and applied for installment loans to the Defendant by entering the applicant in the name of the Plaintiff in the application form for the loan provided by H as shown in attached Table 2, and preparing a certificate of vehicle acquisition and a letter of delegation for the receipt of the vehicle loan in the name of the Plaintiff and delivering it to H.

D On May 20, 2020, the above facts of the crime, etc. were sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for two years by Jeju District Court 2020 Mandan681.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, each installment loan listed in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant installment loan”) concluded a loan contract in the disguised manner with the plaintiff, and there is no evidence to deem that the plaintiff expressed his/her intent as to the above installment loan contract.

Therefore, since it cannot be deemed that the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant was concluded, the plaintiff's obligation based on the installment loan of this case against the defendant does not exist, and the defendant asserts that the contract is valid, there is a benefit to seek confirmation of the existence of the obligation.

The defendant is the name of the plaintiff to D.