1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition are either a dispute between the parties or may be acknowledged by examining the overall purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 2.

Plaintiff

On June 4, 2012, between the Defendant and the Defendant, a contract for subscription to mobile communications services with respect to B mobile phones (hereinafter “instant contract”) was concluded.

B. The instant contract was concluded by an electronic document requesting subscription under the Plaintiff’s name through the Internet shopping mall’s website. The specific procedure consists of the Plaintiff’s name, resident registration number, and entry of personal information, such as the Plaintiff’s name, and address, e-mail, payment card, or account information, etc., into the real name certification process, and the process of obtaining personal certification through an authorized certificate or a credit card holder’s name. At the time of the instant contract, the Defendant performed the Plaintiff’s self-certification by means of an authorized certificate

C. On July 21, 2014, the Plaintiff reported on the damage to the Ulsan Coast Guard to the effect that “the deceased was using the phone by stealing the Plaintiff’s name by stealing the Plaintiff’s name.” However, on September 3, 2014, the Defendant was issued a suspended indictment on September 3, 2014 without specifying the suspect’s name.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On the ground that the contract of this case was not concluded based on the Plaintiff’s intention, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant for confirmation that there is no obligation to use the mobile phone, the Defendant entered into the contract of this case lawfully and effectively through the Plaintiff’s personal information input and the certification procedure, and even if so, it is not so

Even if the defendant concludes the contract of this case, the contract of this case, such as being subject to the procedure of identification under the Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions, shall be the plaintiff.