1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a key telecommunications business operator who provides telecommunications services, and is a company that mainly provides telecommunications services to customers.

B. On June 20, 2016, B connected to the Defendant’s mobile site U hop, which is the Defendant’s mobile site, offered to purchase mobile phone units or to subscribe to mobile phone services in the Plaintiff’s name, and accepted the subscription (hereinafter “instant contract”), and received one mobile phone unit (D) from the Defendant via the Defendant’s phone line, and received the delivery from the Defendant’s address entered in the online subscription application form.

C. B was indicted by the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2017 High Court Decision 2791 and sentenced to a fine of KRW 3,000,000 for criminal facts as stated in the above B B, and the above summary order was finalized as it is.

According to the instant contract, the mobile phone price and the telecommunications rate from July 2016 to March 2017 are 2,808,300 won in total.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings]

2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s cause of action is that B entered into the instant contract by stealing the Plaintiff’s name, and the Defendant was negligent in failing to perform its duty of confirmation at the time of entering into the said contract, and thus the said contract is not effective

3. Determination

A. Article 7(2)2 of the Framework Act on Electronic Commerce (hereinafter “Act”) provides, “Where the received electronic document has been transmitted by a person who has justifiable grounds to believe that it was based on the will of the originator or his/her agent in view of the relationship with the originator or his/her agent, the addressee of the electronic document may regard the expression of intent contained in the electronic document as the originator’s act.” Article 7(3)2 of the Act provides, “The electronic document is not of the originator’s own act.”