1. On March 25, 2013, there is no loan obligation under a loan agreement (loan 10 million won) against the Plaintiff against the Defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 25, 2013, 2013, A male-person B applied for a loan by accessing the Defendant’s savings bank website to the holding of the Plaintiff’s authorized certificate, which was used at the time of ordinary financial transactions, at the office of Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, by entering into a loan agreement with the Defendant savings bank’s employees, with voice changed as if the Plaintiff was a woman, and received a loan of KRW 10 million with the Defendant savings bank’s account in the name of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”), and received a loan of KRW 10 million from another loan company in the name of the Plaintiff in the same manner.

B. B was sentenced to imprisonment on December 22, 2014 by the Incheon District Court due to the above crime.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, result of the USB verification conducted by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, B, who is a male, was conducted as if he was a female, and acquired 10 million won by deceiving the Defendant by concluding the loan contract of this case with the Defendant. Since the Plaintiff did not conclude the loan contract of this case with the Defendant, the Plaintiff is not a party to the loan contract of this case. On the contrary, it is difficult to view that the entries in the evidence Nos. 2 through 7, 9, and 10 are not sufficient to deem the validity of the loan contract of this case to the Plaintiff. There is no

Therefore, there is no obligation of the Plaintiff’s loan to the Defendant based on the instant loan contract.

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted for reasons of the conclusion.