beta
Text
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. As a key telecommunications business operator providing telecommunications services, the Plaintiff provides telecommunications services to C, D, and E (hereinafter “instant Nos. 1, 2, and 3”) in order.
B. On June 26, 2017, a contract for the use of telecommunications services for the first and second lines of this case was concluded by the method that an applicant for the use of telecommunications services requests the purchase of a device and the use of a device by telephone through the counselors belonging to the Plaintiff and receives the device from the Plaintiff’s agency. The contract is accompanied by the Defendant’s driver’s license. The contract is accompanied by the Defendant’s car driver’s license.
C. On July 12, 2017, the contract for the use of telecommunications services for the third line was concluded under the name of the Defendant by the applicant directly visiting the Plaintiff’s agency on July 12, 2017. The contract is accompanied by a certificate of application for issuance of the resident registration certificate issued by the Defendant on July 11, 2017.
The Plaintiff’s amount of use that was not paid to the Plaintiff for the first, second, and third vessels of this case is KRW 1,120,590.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2 through 4 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), the voice of Gap evidence 7, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant entered into a contract for the use of telecommunications services with the defendant on the first, second, and third lines of this case, and that the defendant did not pay KRW 1,120,590, and thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the above amount.
The defendant was a minor at the time and used the FM lines (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant's use number"), and as to the 1, 2, and 3 lines of this case, the plaintiff and the telecommunications services are provided.