1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On August 2018, 2018, the Plaintiff heard the horses that he/she would be able to obtain a loan if he/she had to do so, and issued the said H a copy of his/her identification card, an authorized certificate, and a certified copy of his/her resident registration.

B. On August 9, 2018, H applied for a mobile loan to Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) using the Plaintiff’s mobile phone. A contract was concluded using the Plaintiff’s authorized certificate under the Plaintiff’s name through a personal certification procedure and a loan examination, and was loaned KRW 7.1 million from Defendant B.

C. On August 9, 2018, H applied for online membership to Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant D”) and entered into a mobile phone use contract through a personal certification procedure by entering 16 forms of credit card number 16, effective period, and passwords, and used 3,404,560 won of the mobile phone price.

H On August 8, 2018, Defendant FF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant F”) applied for online membership and entered into a credit card subscription contract using an authorized certificate through the identification procedure. The credit card price was 2,496,341 won in arrears.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 5 through 7 (including various numbers for each type of evidence), Eul evidence 6, 7, Eul evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination of the obligation against Defendant B and F

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) obtained a loan or card from the said Defendants against the Plaintiff’s intent by using an authorized certificate, etc. issued by the Plaintiff, and this is null and void as it is not based on the Plaintiff’s intent. As such, there is no Plaintiff’s obligation under the said loan or credit card subscription contract. (2) A loan or credit card subscription contract concluded with Defendant B and F’s assertion is based on the Plaintiff’s authorized certificate.