beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.09.10 2019나49153

손해배상(국)

Text

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

judgment of the first instance.

Reasons

(c) enter information on the service charge refund account;

C. In electronic litigation, if one party submits a petition of appeal using the electronic litigation system, the name, address, address of service, telephone number, facsimile number, e-mail address, e-mail address, back part of the other party, which is the appellant entered in the electronic litigation system, shall be automatically indicated in the petition of appeal.

On May 25, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming damages against B using the electronic litigation system with Seoul Central District Court 2018Gaso203794 (hereinafter “instant prior lawsuit”).

E. On December 27, 2018, when the judgment of partial winning the Plaintiff was rendered in the instant lawsuit, the attorney of B dissatisfied with the judgment submitted a petition of appeal via the electronic litigation system on January 4, 2019 (hereinafter “written petition of appeal”).

F. The petition of appeal of the preceding lawsuit contains an indication of the Plaintiff’s e-mail address and the rear part of the petition of appeal as “******”.

Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 9, Eul evidence 1 and voice, fact-finding inquiry and reply to the Minister of Court Administration of the first instance court, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Although the Plaintiff consented to the provision of the Plaintiff’s e-mail address and mobile phone number to the Defendant in the preceding lawsuit, the Plaintiff’s personal information was leaked due to the Plaintiff’s display of the Plaintiff’s e-mail address and mobile phone number in the petition of appeal in the preceding lawsuit. 2) Such act of leakage of personal information by public officials belonging to the Defendant violates Article 12(1) and (3) of the Personal Information Protection Act and the Terms and Conditions of Use of Electronic Litigation, and it is obvious

3. Therefore, the defendant is subject to Article 2 (1) of the State Compensation Act, and Personal Information Protection Act.