[1] In a case where a credit card holder's secret number leaks from a member to another person, all the liability that arises from the divulgence of a credit card number shall belong to the member, and where a credit card holder's secret number is excluded from compensation for unlawful use, whether the member is liable to compensate for damage caused by unlawful use of a credit card even in the absence of intention or negligence (negative), and the person who bears the burden of

[2] The case holding that, in case where a person without a name was stolen from a credit card and withdrawn money by cash service without any error in the password, the credit card member did not prove that he/she had no intention nor negligence on the part of the credit card user, management, and password solely on the ground that the process of divulgence was not revealed

[1] In the terms and conditions of a credit card member, the liability arising from the divulgence of a password from a credit card member to another person shall be attributed to the member, and in the case of an unlawful use of a credit card password, the liability of the member for the unlawful use of the credit card shall be excluded from compensation, and the interpretation that the above terms and conditions of a credit card member shall be held invalid as it constitutes a provision which, without good cause, transfers the risk that the member should bear, to the customer without good cause, under Article 7 subparagraph 2 of the Regulation of Terms and Conditions. In addition, in accordance with the above provisions of a credit card member agreement, which is a transaction clause between the credit card company and the member, the member is obliged to perform the duty of due care of a good manager in the use, management, and password of the credit card. Therefore, in the event that a third party loses or stolen the credit card and uses the credit card illegally, it shall be deemed that there is no negligence on the part of the member in disclosing the loss, theft, and password of the credit card.

[2] The case holding that in case where a person without a name has stolen a credit card and withdrawn money by cash services, etc. without any error in the password, the credit card member did not prove that there was no intention or negligence on the part of the credit card member on the part of the mere fact that the process of divulgence was not revealed

[1] Article 7 subparagraph 2 of the Regulation of Standardized Contracts Act, Article 288 of the Civil Procedure Act / [2] Article 288 of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff (Law Firm Tae, Attorneys Kim U-U.S. et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant

Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2008Na9073 Decided April 1, 2009

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Ground of appeal No. 1

According to the reasoning of the judgment below and the records, Article 3 (Management of Card) of the Revised Terms and Conditions for Credit Card (Personal Card) of the Plaintiff bank as amended on May 27, 2005 provides that "No member shall lend or use this card for the purpose of transfer or security, and no member shall use or manage the card with due care as a good manager (Paragraph 2). All responsibilities arising from non-compliance with the matters of paragraphs 1 through 3 above shall accrue to the member (Paragraph 4)." Article 5 (C) provides that "When a member uses deposit-related transactions through an automatic cash payment machine, all responsibilities arising from the divulgence of secret number from the account shall accrue to the member without any reasonable reason (Paragraph 3)" and Article 16 (Notice and Loss Handling of Card) provides that "No more than 5 days of fraud or loss of the card to the member without reasonable reason shall be reported to the member's own intention or loss of the card to the third party, and that no more than 16 days of fraud or loss of the card shall be reported to the member's without reason."

In addition, in accordance with the above provisions of a credit card company's terms and conditions of transaction between the credit card company and the member, the member is obligated to perform his/her duty of due care as a good manager in the use, management and password of the credit card. Thus, in the event that a third party uses a credit card unlawfully, the loss or theft of the credit card and the loss or theft of the credit card and the escape of the credit card member in order for the credit card member to be exempted from his/her liability, the credit card company has no negligence on the part of the

In light of the records, the court below held that the credit card merchant agreement of the plaintiff bank as amended on May 27, 2005 did not distinguish the cash service and the withdrawal of deposits and applied to the withdrawal of deposits using the credit card of this case where the cash card function is added to the cash card, and held that the bank is responsible for compensating for the cash service or the withdrawal of deposits due to the illegal use of the credit card by a third party if it proves that the member did not act intentionally or negligently on the part of the third party. It is just in accordance with the above legal principles and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on the validity of the credit card merchant agreement of this case and the burden of proof.

2. The second ground for appeal

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant used the defendant's bank's bank's name and password No. 2, and the defendant used the defendant's bank's credit card No. 2, No. 3 and no. 2, no. 7, and no. 2, no. 5, and no. 3, no. 5, no. 2, and no. 2, no. 3, no. 5, and no. 2, no. 3, no. 5, and no. 2, no. 5, no. 5, and no. 3, no. 5, no. 2, and no. 2, no. 3, a bank's name and no. 5, no. 5, and no. 2, no. 3:

The judgment of the court below to the same purport is just and there is no violation of the rules of evidence as alleged in the grounds for appeal.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Shin Young-chul (Presiding Justice)