채무부존재확인의 소
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a person with a hearing disability of Grade II, who is unable to communicate with the general public other than by using sign language or cellphone text.
On July 2017, the Plaintiff first became aware of Nonparty F, who operated convenience points in E-S in E-S. D around 2017.
B. Around August 25, 2017, F applied for a non-face-to-face online loan to the Plaintiff’s mobile service without the Plaintiff’s consent to the effect that the Plaintiff voluntarily applied for a loan to an employee in distress of the Defendant, and the Plaintiff at the time applied for a non-face-to-face online loan to the effect that the Plaintiff is
The above-mentioned online loan application was signed by the authorized certificate in the name of the plaintiff himself/herself, and the health insurance qualification acquisition certificate and the health insurance payment certificate for the plaintiff were submitted for the purpose of proof of employment.
C. The Defendant-in-charge remitted F’s loan application amounting to KRW 8,00,00,000 to the Plaintiff’s account entered in the Plaintiff’s name at the time of loan, and F withdrawn money from the said account using the passbook.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant loan”) D.
F was accused by the Plaintiff due to the above fraud crime, etc., and on November 13, 2019, the F was legally detained by having been sentenced to six months of imprisonment for the method of Seoul Northern Site.
[Ground of recognition] No dispute exists, evidence Nos. 1 through 4, each entry of evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the ground of the Plaintiff’s claim
A. The instant loan in the name of the Plaintiff against the Defendant, which caused the instant claim, was not applied for a loan made by the Plaintiff’s act or intent, but by F’s criminal act using the Plaintiff’s hearing impairment, etc., and thus, there is no loan obligation in the Plaintiff.
B. 1) Determination of the relevant legal doctrine and the Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions (hereinafter “Electronic Document Act”).
Article 7 (2) (2) 2 shall be the originator or his/her electronic document received.