logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.30 2014가단140210
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 14, 2012, the Plaintiff’s name entered into an online application form for online mobile phone B through the Internet shopping mall, and on December 17, 2012, the Defendant’s consent thereto entered into a contract for subscription to mobile communications services provided by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. The instant contract was concluded by an electronic document requesting subscription under the Plaintiff’s name was submitted to the Defendant through the Internet shopping mall site. The specific procedure consists of the Plaintiff’s name, resident registration number and input of personal information, such as the Plaintiff’s name, address, e-mail, payment card or account information, etc., through the Plaintiff’s real name certification process, and the process of obtaining identification through an authorized certificate or a credit card holder’s credit card certification. The Defendant, at the time of the instant contract, has obtained a credit card (national VSA card’s name, resident registration number, card number, term of validity, password, etc.) in the Plaintiff’s name, and confirmed that the Plaintiff’s identity card is a contract by the Plaintiff himself/herself by facsimile.

C. On May 21, 2014, the Plaintiff reported damage to the Daegu Dong-dong Police Station to the effect that “the deceased was using a mobile phone by stealing the Plaintiff’s name by stealing the Plaintiff’s name.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Eul 1-5 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. 1) The parties’ assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s instant contract concluded by stealing the name of the Plaintiff by stealing the name of the Plaintiff, and thus, there is no effect on the Plaintiff’s debt to the Defendant based on the instant contract. 2) The Defendant’s instant contract concluded lawful and effective through the procedures, such as the Plaintiff’s personal information input and credit card certification, and the Plaintiff’s legitimate power of attorney to the name of the

arrow