A. An electronic bill issued by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant bill”) with “the issuance date July 20, 2018; (a) No. C, and due date October 27, 2018; and (b) No. 45,100,000 won at face value” was delivered to D; (b) D endorsed made an endorsement on the said bill for the payment of the price of sand supplied by the Plaintiff, and issued the said bill to the Plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff presented a payment proposal within the period of presentment for payment, but was rejected on October 29, 2019 on the ground of the receipt of the accident report (the acceptance of the report, the failure of the contract).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2 (including virtual number) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant, the issuer of the Promissory Notes, is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 45,100,000 as well as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum as stipulated by the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act from November 17, 2018 to April 26, 2019, the day following the delivery date of the instant complaint, as the Plaintiff seeks, and from the next day to the day of full payment, 15% per annum as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

B. The Defendant’s assertion argues to the effect that, in collusion with G, the representative director of the Plaintiff, D, and F corporation, the Plaintiff would accept the instant bill from the Defendant in order to pay sand to D’s Plaintiff, and that, on August 30, 2018, the F corporation would supply the instant bill to the Defendant by August 30, 2018, on the ground that the F corporation would deliver the instant bill to E who represented the said company with the advance payment, and did not receive the said sand, the Defendant was not liable to pay the Plaintiff the instant bill.

Even if the Defendant issued the Promissory Notes through E fraud, it is merely a personal defense, so the holder of the Promissory Notes does not acquire the Promissory Notes with knowledge that it would prejudice the debtor.