2018da 5194234 Action to invalidate the contract

A

Since the legal representative is an adult ward B

Attorney Yu-hee, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

C Stock Companies

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other

March 12, 2019

May 14, 2019

1. It is confirmed that a mobile phone service subscription agreement entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on January 13, 2017 is null and void.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person with mental disability of Grade II. The Plaintiff remains at the level of young children of 5-6 years of age with intellectual ability and judgment ability to the extent of 38 years of age. As a result, the Plaintiff was hospitalized in a mental department and hospital for at least three years, and the decision to commence adult guardianship was finalized on August 22, 2017.

B. On January 13, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a mobile phone service subscription agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant mobile phone service subscription agreement”) and entered into a mobile phone service subscription agreement with F Co., Ltd. on January 15, 2017.

C. E entered into each subscription contract and deposited the mobile phone received into its own account. For this reason, E was subject to a disposition of penalty of KRW 1 million due to the suspicion of embezzlement from the office of origin in the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 16, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

Expression of intention means mental ability or intelligence that can reasonably determine its meaning or result based on normal perception and towing ability. In particular, in a case where a certain juristic act is given with a special legal meaning or effect that makes it difficult to understand only the ordinary meaning in a case where it is given, it is necessary to understand not only the ordinary meaning of the act, but also the legal meaning or effect in order to recognize its mental capacity. The existence of mental capacity should be individually determined in relation to specific juristic acts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Da10113, Oct. 11, 200; 2006Da29358, Sept. 22, 2006).

In light of the following circumstances found based on the above facts, namely, the Plaintiff’s I Q was 38 years of age, and appears to have failed to understand the meaning and contents of the Plaintiff’s obligations stipulated in the contract because it remains at the age of 5-6, and there was no reason for the Plaintiff to open a mobile phone at one time, the Plaintiff shall be deemed to have no mental capacity to understand a series of legal meanings and effects that the Plaintiff, the nominal owner of the instant mobile phone, should pay for the instant mobile phone costs and terminal bills due to the instant mobile phone. Thus, the Plaintiff’s mobile phone service subscription agreement concluded by the Plaintiff is null and void as it was concluded in a state of lack of mental capacity.

Therefore, the Plaintiff did not have any obligation based on the instant mobile phone service subscription agreement against the Defendants, and thus, there is a benefit to seek confirmation of the absence of obligation against the Plaintiff.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Choi Yong-ho