beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.09.05 2018나12741

채무부존재확인

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The part of “1. Basic Facts” among the grounds of the judgment of the first instance shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

Each of the loan contracts of this case, as alleged by the plaintiff, is concluded by stealing the name of the plaintiff without knowledge of the plaintiff, and is not formed based on the plaintiff's intent.

Since an authorized certificate is frequently used for illegal reproduction or unauthorized use, so long as the Defendants did not confirm their intent by telephone communications, etc. with the Plaintiff, the lender himself/herself, the mere reason that the Plaintiff’s contract was concluded based on the Plaintiff’s authorized certificate does not constitute a justifiable reason to believe that the Defendants had the intent to conclude a loan contract.

The Defendants’ assertion that each of the loan contracts of this case was concluded by digital signature based on an authorized certificate, and thus, it should be deemed that it was lawfully concluded according to the Plaintiff’s intent

Judgment

Article 7(2)2 of the Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions (hereinafter “Electronic Document Act”) provides that “Where an electronic document received has been sent by a person who has justifiable grounds to believe that it was based on the will of the originator or his/her agent by virtue of the relationship with the originator or his/her agent, the addressee of the electronic document may regard the expression of intent contained in the electronic document as the originator’s act.”

Article 11 of the same Act provides that matters concerning digital signatures in electronic commerce shall be governed by the Digital Signature Act. Article 3(2) of the Digital Signature Act provides that "where a certified digital signature exists, the relevant digital signature shall be signed, sealed, or sealed by the Signatory, and the content thereof shall be presumed not to have been changed after the digital signature was affixed." Article 18-2 of the same Act provides that "the person concerned shall be identified by other Acts through an authorized certificate."