채무부존재확인
1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Basic Facts
A. On December 13, 2015, each loan transaction was made under the Plaintiff’s name, as shown in the Defendants’ list and the separate sheet.
(hereinafter referred to as "the first loan contract of this case", and the remaining loan contracts of this case are referred to as "the same manner", and when each of the above loan contracts is referred to as "the respective loan contracts of this case". (b)
On December 14, 2015, the Plaintiff reported to the Seosan Police Station that the Plaintiff suffered damage by taking out loans from financial institutions by stealing his/her name.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 6, and the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings by the parties concerned does not have concluded each of the loans of this case with the defendants, and since all of the parties uses loans from the defendants by stealing his name and personal information. Thus, the plaintiff does not bear any obligation of loans based on each of the loans of this case.
The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff had been provided with the Plaintiff’s personal information at the time of each of the instant loan contracts and had gone through the procedure of identification through an authorized certificate, etc., so each of the instant loan contracts was duly and effectively concluded between the Defendants and the Plaintiff’s agent.
Judgment
Articles 4 through 7, 9, and 10 of the Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions (hereinafter “Electronic Documents Act”) shall apply to electronic documents used for electronic financial transactions of relevant regulations (Article 5(1)). Article 7(2)2 of the Electronic Document Act provides that where the electronic document received is sent by a person who has justifiable grounds that the addressee would have based on the will of the originator or his/her agent, according to 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.