logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원여주지원 2014.04.03 2013가단11012
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 6, 2012, through the Defendant’s Internet homepage-rate program, a mobile phone (number B) subscription and a mobile terminal installment trading contract was concluded in the Plaintiff’s name (hereinafter “instant contract”).

(b)A contract for subscription to telecommunications services and for the installment sale of terminal devices through the above T-L Rate Program shall be made in accordance with the following procedures:

(1) Real Name Certificate : The applicant's name and resident number are entered, Shebed by a credit rating agency to verify the application: the applicant's contact address, address of delivery place, settlement method, etc. are entered, and the automatic transfer is selected by means of settlement method, and the bank name, account number, etc. is additionally entered, and the bank name, account number, etc. are entered, and the applicant's valid inspection is followed, and the applicant's certification method is chosen, and the applicant's certification by means of an authorized certificate is completed by entering the name of the bank, account number, etc.

C. The instant contract was concluded in accordance with the procedure set out in the foregoing Paragraph, and the Plaintiff’s name, resident registration number, etc. was entered in the application form drafted at that time, and the Plaintiff’s certification was conducted by means of an authorized certificate.

The charges for mobile telephone use and terminal bills imposed under the instant contract are equivalent to KRW 2,646,890 until May 21, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 7 and 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant contract was concluded by the unsatisfying Plaintiff’s name by stealing the Plaintiff’s name. Therefore, there is no obligation against the Defendant for the mobile phone usage fee and terminal price of KRW 1,546,890 under the instant contract.

B. (1) We first examine whether the instant contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant can be deemed to have been concluded.

Modern, electronic documents, and.

arrow