명의도용으로인한 채무부존재확인의 소
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. E used the Plaintiff’s identification card issued by the Plaintiff from the Plaintiff to December 3, 2014, opened a mobile phone in the Plaintiff’s name and opened an enterprise bank account in the Plaintiff’s name from September 6, 2016, and obtained an authorized certificate in the Plaintiff’s name.
B. On August 23, 2016, Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B Bank”) had access to the website, prepared a credit transaction agreement in the name of the Plaintiff, and applied for a loan by means of a digital signature using an authorized certificate in the name of the Plaintiff.
Defendant B Bank approved the loan after going through an identification process through the Plaintiff’s mobile phone name, and paid KRW 14,603,00 to the Plaintiff’s corporate bank account on the same day.
C. On March 29, 2018, E visited Defendant C Co., Ltd (hereinafter “C”)’s mobile website, prepared a loan transaction agreement under the Plaintiff’s name and applied for a loan by digital signature using an authorized certificate under the Plaintiff’s name.
Defendant C approved the loan after going through the identification process through the mobile phone in the Plaintiff’s name, and on the same day, Defendant C paid KRW 3,000,000 to an enterprise bank account in the Plaintiff’s name.
E, on March 29, 2018, visited Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant D Bank”)’s website, prepared an application for a loan in the name of the Plaintiff, and applied for a loan by digital signature using the Plaintiff’s authorized certificate.
Defendant D Bank approved the loan after going through the process of self-certification through the mobile phone in the name of the Plaintiff, and on the same day, it pays KRW 3,000,000 to the corporate bank account in the name of the Plaintiff.
E. E uses the Plaintiff’s digital signature creating key for the illegal use of the Plaintiff’s digital signature creating key even though the consent or delegation of the loan was not obtained from the Plaintiff, and the crime of writing and exercising the Plaintiff’s digital signature creating key was committed, and the crime of violating the Digital Signature Act and the Defendants.