logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.01 2014가단132325
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 22, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the sale of mobile phones and for the service of mobile phones (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant LOFS Co., Ltd., and the phone number “B” was allocated on November 16, 2012. On November 16, 2012, a contract for the sale of mobile phones devices and for the service of mobile phones (hereinafter “instant contract 2”) was concluded with Defendant K Co., Ltd., and the phone number “C” was allocated.

B. Each of the instant contracts was made through the online website, and it was done through a digital signature verification process based on an authorized certificate in lieu of identification verification.

C. The Plaintiff, ELS Co., Ltd., demanded that Defendant 1 pay the telephone fee and the installment of the device 974,790 won based on the instant contract, and Defendant K Co., Ltd pay the telephone fee and the installment of the device 1,196,750 won based on the instant contract 2.

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

2. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff did not enter into each of the instant contracts with the Defendants, and that “D” as indicated in the Evidence No. 2 and Evidence No. 1 of the Plaintiff’s contact number was not the number of mobile telephone used by the Plaintiff at the time of each of the instant contracts, and that no mobile telephone service was involved in the said number, the Plaintiff appears to have entered into each of the instant contracts by stealing the Plaintiff’s name. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s obligation under each of the instant contracts is nonexistent.

The results of each fact-finding on the KNP Co., Ltd., LFers, EMs Co., Ltd., Ltd., and the KNP Co., Ltd. are written as the Plaintiff’s contact information in the evidence Nos. 2 and No. 1.

arrow