A card created secretly by an employee... Court: “Issuance is invalid, there is no obligation to repay the money”

The court ruled that credit cards issued in stolen names do not have any debt for use.

On September 30, the Seoul Central District Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by customer A against the credit card company to confirm the absence of debt.

Mr. A, who was running a business, belatedly found out in 2021 that an employee had obtained a credit card using his name. As a result of checking the usage history with the credit card company, a balance of approximately 28 million won was accumulated for Mr. A.

Mr. A denied the fact that the card was issued. It is said that the employee was issued a card using his/her own mobile phone and ID card. Therefore, it was argued that there was no obligation to repay the usage fee. However, the credit card company's position was different. It is confirmed that a direct phone call was made with Mr. A at the time of signing the contract, and that the card was delivered to Mr. A's workplace. In addition, he emphasized that the employee's unauthorized use of the credit card was caused by Mr. A's careless management of personal information, and that he had an obligation to repay the debt.

The court ruled in Mr. A’s favor. The court said, “If you look at the call records submitted by the credit card company, the voice in the recording does not match the voice of Mr. A,” adding, “Rather, he is closer to an employee impersonating Mr. A.” At the same time, he explained that “the address to which the card was sent is not Mr. A’s place of business but the employee’s residence,” and it cannot be seen that Mr. A signed the contract directly.

At the same time, it was ruled that “as long as the credit card contract for the plaintiff is not valid, the ‘carelessness’ claimed by the credit card company is not established,” and “there is no debt for the use of the credit card in question.”

Attorney Lee Ki-eun of Daeryun Law Firm (Limited), who represented the plaintiff, said, “Card companies must verify identity in accordance with legal procedures when issuing credit cards,” and added, “Even when issuing cards, they must closely examine whether the person requesting issuance is the one receiving the card.”

Attorney Lee added, “Due to the credit card company’s mistake, the credit card was issued and delivered to an employee rather than Mr. A.” He added, “We were able to obtain a reasonable result by taking into account the fact that the employee acknowledged that he had obtained and used the card by stealing Mr. A’s name.”

[View full article] - A card created secretly by an employee... Court: “Issuance is invalid, no obligation to repay money” (Shortcut)