beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the parties concerned had concluded a contract with the Plaintiff, the father of B, who was a minor at the time of June 11, 2012, to purchase the mobile phone in a part of the mobile phone without the Plaintiff’s consent. As such, the Plaintiff did not have the obligation to pay the Defendant the installment of the device accordingly.
(It is understood that the contract is cancelled) and seek confirmation of the absence of the cost of installing a cell phone against the defendant.
In this regard, the defendant asserted that the plaintiff knew that the above B applied for use of the mobile phone without the plaintiff's consent and purchased the mobile phone, but ratification was made thereafter.
2. Determination
A. It is insufficient to recognize that Gap evidence Nos. 1 was prepared by the plaintiff or prepared with the plaintiff's prior consent merely with the descriptions of Nos. 3 and 4 related issues.
Therefore, the issue of this case is whether the plaintiff ratified the purchase contract of terminal installment to be made by a minor child without his/her consent.
B. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 through 8 of the judgment on the issues at issue, B, who is a minor, purchased a mobile device with an application for joining the mobile phone from the Plaintiff to purchase the mobile device on June 11, 2012, and then signed the Plaintiff on the “legal representative” column of the installment sales contract (which claims that the Plaintiff is the party B and B was the legal representative without the Plaintiff’s consent, and the “B” column of the installment sales contract is stated in the “B” and the “A” column of information on legal representative” is stated in the “B” column of the installment sales contract. In full view of the above, the parties to the contract to the contract to sell the mobile device shall be deemed as the parties to the contract to sell the mobile device at issue.