beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.10.15 2018나61492

기타(금전)

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim and the additional selective claims in this court are all dismissed.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendants issued and delivered to the Plaintiff a promissory note which is the Defendants of the issuer (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) on July 22, 2009, the issue date of which was July 22, 2009, and the due date of which was October 22, 2009.

B. On July 22, 2009, the Plaintiff, a notary public, holds a notarial deed of bill No. 3527, 2009, stating, “When the Defendant delays the payment of the above amount to the bearer of the Promissory Notes, he/she shall accept without objection even if he/she is immediately subject to compulsory execution.”

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff claimed reimbursement of benefit was issued the Promissory Notes in order to guarantee the payment of KRW 70,00,000 to the Defendants. However, on October 22, 2009, the due date for the payment of the Promissory Notes expired with the lapse of the statute of limitations. The Plaintiff, a joint issuer, obtained a benefit of the amount equivalent to the face value by discharging the Defendants’ obligation to pay the Promissory Notes.

Therefore, the Plaintiff seek payment of KRW 70,000,000 as an exercise of the right to claim reimbursement of benefit against the Defendants and damages for delay.

B. Around July 22, 2009, the Plaintiff lent KRW 70,000,000 to Defendant C, and Defendant B guaranteed Defendant C’s loan obligations.

Therefore, the Plaintiff seek 70,000,000 won and damages for delay as an exercise of the right to claim a loan against the Defendants.

3. Judgment on the issue

(a)In determining a claim for reimbursement of benefit, where a bill has been issued or endorsed in order to secure a debt arising from a causeal relationship, the claim for reimbursement of benefit does not occur to the drawer or endorser even if the claim has expired by prescription, and this is also due to the cause, such as prescription.