beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.01.19 2014나2020811

공개청구 등

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs falling under the following order of payment shall be revoked.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The Defendants are telecommunications business operators under the Telecommunications Business Act and providers of information and communications services under the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”).

Plaintiff

A and Defendant SK Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “SK”), Plaintiff B entered into a mobile telephone use agreement with Defendant LG Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “LG”), and Plaintiff C entered into a mobile telephone use agreement with Defendant SK and LG, and use mobile telephone services.

Plaintiff

C entered into a mobile phone use contract with Defendant KT Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "KT"), and used mobile phone services until December 2012.

On November 28, 2013, Plaintiff A requested Defendant SK to inform the investigative agencies, intelligence agencies, etc. of whether the provision of its communications data was made or provided through the customer bulletin board and the details of the provision were known.

In this regard, Defendant SK rejected the above contents on the ground that they should be confirmed through investigation agencies, not by communications agencies.

Plaintiff

B requested Defendant LG to provide the same content through e-mail on November 23, 2012 and February 22, 2013.

As to this, Defendant LG did not answer any question, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on April 16, 2013, and responded that there was no provision of the said Plaintiff’s communications data through the written response of May 21, 2013.

Plaintiff

C on January 8, 2013, the Defendants requested the same content through e-mail.

As to this, Defendant SK did not answer, and the above Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on April 16, 2013, and Defendant GIST responded that: (a) on May 14, 2013; and (b) on May 21, 2013, Defendant LG did not provide each of the above Plaintiff’s communications data through the instant written response to May 21, 2013.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 6, 7 through 9, Eul.