1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a credit card company that issues and manages credit cards, and the Defendant is a person who is issued and used a credit card after attending the Plaintiff’s membership.

B. The Defendant did not pay the user fee on the agreed date when using the credit card issued by the Plaintiff, and on April 4, 2018, the unpaid amount on the standard is as follows.

The fact that there is no dispute over 23.5% per annum of cash services 730,00 won per annum 23.5% per annum of 24.5% per annum of 794,260 won, 84,230 won, 824,620 won per annum of 24.5% per annum of 1,486,246 won,182 won,516,428 won, 23.5% per annum of 730,000 won of cash services 23,688 won, 753,68 won per annum of 76% per annum of 794,260 won per annum

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at an overdue interest rate of 26% per annum with respect to KRW 3,094,736 in total, including the amount of credit card use and late payment charges (=824,620 won, KRW 1,516,428 won, KRW 753,688), and the amount of installments from April 5, 2018 to the date of full payment, 794,260 won from April 5, 2018 to the date of full payment, 24.5% per annum, 1,486,246 won in lump sum, and 23.5% per annum with respect to cash service 730,00 won.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant's assertion is a disabled person with no income, and the plaintiff issued a credit card without making an appropriate examination.

Application of the same standard as the general person to the defendant constitutes a discriminatory act under Article 4 (2) of the Act on Prohibition of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter “Act on Prohibition of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities”), and a credit card member agreement entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant is null and void.

B. The judgment of the court below is just and justifiable, although the issuance of the Plaintiff’s credit card is not disadvantageous to the disabled under Article 4(1)2 of the Act on the Prohibition of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities.