1. The Plaintiff’s obligation under the loan contract concluded on December 23, 2014 against Defendant B does not exist.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 2014, the Plaintiff issued to F a copy of an identification card, resident registration card, and deposit passbook with Nonparty F, which was known to the Plaintiff in the course of performing an artist’s panty club activity, stating that “A person works for the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, who is able to benefit from an importer, will lower the health insurance fee on the face of the week,” and the Plaintiff issued to F a copy of the identification card, resident registration card, and deposit passbook, and F opened a bank passbook with the Plaintiff’s name.

B. Around December 23, 2014, F applied for a loan to a loan employee of Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) by telephone, and was committed by the Plaintiff. Defendant B by deceiving Defendant B by means of receiving a certification number for identification with the mobile phone in the Plaintiff’s name, and the date of issuance of the Plaintiff’s resident registration certificate, etc., and by deceiving Defendant B on December 23, 2019, the payment period of KRW 3,000,000 between the Defendant B and the Defendant B was due, and was paid KRW 2,91,395 as the bank account in the Plaintiff’s name.

C. On April 20, 2015, Defendant D received a credit transaction agreement (personal credit loan) in the Plaintiff’s name through Defendant D’s Internet homepage in electronic form, and then lent KRW 3,000,000 to the bank account in the Plaintiff’s name on April 20, 2020, and on the same day, the maturity period of payment was 29.9% per annum. In the process, the Plaintiff’s authorized certificate issued by the licensed certification authority and the Plaintiff’s cellular phone certification were used.

F was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a year of imprisonment due to fraud, etc. by the Seoul Central District Court 2016Kadan8679, which is the criminal facts such as deceiving financial institutions to borrow loans by deceiving them, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul 1.