beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a member of D, a transaction site of virtual currency “C”, and the Defendant is a company operating D.
B. another site E trading “C” exists, and the Plaintiff sent the “C” from D to E on June 12, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff asserted that: (a) on June 12, 2018, the Plaintiff sought to transmit C 1,800,000 of the Plaintiff’s e-mail opened in E from the e-mail opened in D on June 12, 2018.
The Plaintiff: (a) divided the Plaintiff’s electronic wall address (F) established in E and copied the computer key; (b) divided the key into the blank address column of the D site and added the key into the blank address column of the D site and applied for withdrawal; (crul v key; and (c) transferred money to another address (G), which is not the above electronic wall address.
(hereinafter “instant transmission”). In other words, the instant transmission was not due to the Plaintiff’s actual cost but due to the Defendant’s error in D’s operation, and even if not due to the inherent incomplete nature in C, the Defendant did not have notified the Plaintiff, a member, of the risk of such error in advance.
Therefore, the Defendant is liable for nonperformance or tort, and thus, is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for the amount of KRW 91.8 million equivalent to the market price of KRW C1,800,000, which is the damage suffered by the Plaintiff.
B. In light of the following circumstances that can be recognized by adding the overall purport of the pleadings in evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4 (including paper numbers), the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that C was transmitted to another address of another electronic wallet because the Plaintiff’s error, namely, the error of D, or incompleteness inherent in C, although the Plaintiff accurately entered the electronic wallet address, is based on the Defendant’s fault, i.e., the error of D, and
① The Plaintiff is the same as D from May 23, 2018 to June 14, 2018.