beta
Text
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The Defendant’s KRW 8,114,617 and KRW 687,762 among the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s KRW 19, May 19, 2017.
Reasons
Basic Facts
On February 1, 2016, the Plaintiff issued a credit card (hereinafter “instant credit card”) after receiving an application for membership of the Defendant’s credit card under the Plaintiff’s name in electronic form on the Plaintiff’s Internet homepage.
The plaintiff's application for a credit card membership received in electronic form had a digital signature using the defendant's authorized certificate issued by the licensed certification authority.
Since then, the amount of arrears as of May 18, 2017 due to the delinquency of the credit card user fee and credit card loans, the amount of arrears as of May 18, 2017 is KRW 687,762, late-payment 13,864, late-payment 7,00,000, the principal of credit card loans, the agreed interest of KRW 185,09, overdue interest of KRW 227,892, overdue interest of KRW 8,114,617, and the overdue interest rate of credit card loans is KRW 23.7% per annum, and the overdue interest rate of credit card loans is 23.3% per annum.
[Based on the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the entire pleadings, and the validity of the credit card issuance through the entire purport of the pleadings, and the plaintiff's credit card No. 8,114,617 won in total, and the credit card No. 687,762 won in total, and the principal amount of credit card bills No. 687,762 won in total and the principal amount of credit card loans No. 7,000,000 won in total.
The defendant did not have filed an application for the issuance of credit cards with the plaintiff, and since C, the defendant's child, prepared an application for the membership of credit cards by stealing the defendant's name, the defendant is not liable for the issuance and use of credit cards
Judgment
Article 7 (2) 2 of the Framework Act on Electronic Documents and Transactions (hereinafter referred to as the "Electronic Document Act") shall apply to a person who has justifiable grounds to believe that the received electronic document is based on the will of the originator or his/her agent, in view of the relationship with the originator or his/her agent.