The first hearing in a damages lawsuit filed by about 9,000 consumers over last year's hacking of SK Telecom's USIM (subscriber identity module) information was held on the 26th. In court, arguments centered on whether the plaintiffs had lawfully delegated litigation authority and whether the plaintiffs are actual SK Telecom subscribers.
The Seoul Central District Court Civil Agreement Division 30 (Presiding Judge Kim Seok-beom, Director General) held the first hearing date in a damages lawsuit filed by 9,165 people, including a person surnamed Kim, against SK Telecom. The amount in controversy in this case is a little over 4.5 billion won.
SK Telecom argued there were indications that some plaintiffs participated redundantly as parties, and that for some plaintiffs it was unclear whether they are actual SK Telecom users, challenging the plaintiffs' standing and the circumstances of their delegation.
An SK Telecom attorney said, "A considerable number (of delegations) were obtained through very simple means such as Google Forms, and it was possible for multiple people to apply with a single ID," adding, "It was entirely possible to proceed (with delegations) without verification by family members, etc." The attorney continued, "Not only the plaintiffs' delegation but also whether the plaintiffs are (SK Telecom) users is uncertain," and argued, "Verification that the individual delegated is necessary for the lawsuit to begin, and proof of that is required."
The plaintiffs, however, pushed back, saying they merely accepted applications to join in line with standard procedures for multi-party litigation. A plaintiffs' attorney noted, "In class actions, applications to participate (in the lawsuit) are received via Naver Forms or various methods, and there have been no cases conducted otherwise," adding, "The defendant's claim sounds like setting up people who are not actually participating in the lawsuit as fake plaintiffs." The attorney added, "This appears to be nothing but a delaying tactic to stall this case and block other victims from joining the lawsuit."
The court organized the issues between the sides, saying that under the Civil Procedure Act it can require a procedure to confirm the intent to delegate. The court suggested recognizing the delegation intent as confirmed if the plaintiffs submitted an ID or completed identity verification through an electronic process.
The plaintiffs, however, maintained that identity can be sufficiently verified through online application methods alone. A plaintiffs' attorney explained, "For Naver Forms or Google Forms, you must have an ID to use them," adding, "It is not realistic to expect someone to fill in another person's name, resident registration number, and contact information in full."
The court asked the plaintiffs to submit materials explaining the structure of the system for applying to join the lawsuit and the identity verification procedures. It also said that if the defense submits explanatory materials supporting its claim that an application can be filed on another person's behalf, it will review together how far identity verification is actually possible.
While stating that the burden of proof lies with the plaintiffs on whether they are SK Telecom subscribers, the court also asked the defense to cooperate. The court said, "If SK Telecom informs the method of verifying subscriber status, the plaintiffs should prove it according to that method."
The court also asked the plaintiffs to specify whether the damages from the leak of USIM information are emotional or property damage and to submit evidence proving this.
The plaintiffs are demanding that SK Telecom acknowledge negligence, including violations of its obligations to protect information and to report, and apologize to the victims; disclose transparently the exact content and scope of the leaked information; clarify whether the USIM secret key (K) was leaked; pay 500,000 won per person in consolation money; and take measures to prevent secondary damage.
The court set the next hearing date for July 9.