1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 24, 2017, a credit transaction agreement was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the terms of lending KRW 20,000,000, annual interest on loans, KRW 14.9%, and principal and interest within 60 months.

(hereinafter “instant loan agreement”). (b)

At the time of the preparation of the above credit transaction agreement, the defendant connected the homepage of the Road Traffic Authority, confirmed the identity of the plaintiff with the driver's license number of the plaintiff, received a written confirmation of acquisition of qualifications for health insurance, a health care insurance premium payment certificate, and a long-term care insurance premium payment certificate with income evidential documents, and prepared a credit transaction agreement by means of electronic financial transaction, which

C. In addition, on April 24, 2017, the Defendant remitted KRW 20,000,000 to the account of the Korea Federation (Account Number: E) opened in the name of the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 6 (including provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On August 2016, the Plaintiff’s wife F, upon the Plaintiff’s request from the bond company that was taking monetary liability, notified the above bond company of the Plaintiff’s basic personal information, DF’s account number, physical card password, mobile phone number, etc., and issued the Plaintiff’s family relation certificate, resident registration copy, abstract, and physical check card, etc. (2) However, on June 30, 2017, the Plaintiff became aware of the fact that the instant loan contract was concluded only when he/she was notified of the nature of the loan under the instant loan contract from the Defendant, and the voice contained in the recording of the loan process confirmed by the Defendant bank was not the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff did not enter into the instant loan contract.