beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. B Hospital issued a copy of a Promissory Notes, the par value of which is 140,000,000, and delivered to a Pamper Co., Ltd. on February 5, 2015, as follows:
- Dates: - The place of issue on February 5, 2015 - The place of issue: Gangwon-gun C- the place of payment: The Nong Bank D- the due date: June 30, 2015 - The addressee: the Co., Ltd.
B. B Hospital issued a promissory note with face value of 33,000,000, and delivered to the Pampers Co., Ltd. on April 24, 2015, as follows:
- Dates: - Publication on April 17, 2015 - The place of publication: Gangwon-gun C-Payment Place: Nonghyup Bank D - The due date: July 18, 2015 - The payee Co., Ltd.
C. On June 19, 2015, a Co., Ltd.:
paragraphs 1 and 2.
Each promissory note stated in the subsection (hereinafter “each promissory note of this case”) was endorsed and transferred to the Defendant, and the Defendant, on the same day, endorsed and transferred each of the said promissory notes to the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff is the final holder of each of the Promissory Notes, and each of the Promissory Notes was presented within the payment deadline, but was rejected on the ground of non-transaction.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant, who is an endorser of each of the Promissory Notes in this case, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, who is the final holder, the total sum of KRW 173,000,000 and delay damages therefor, barring special circumstances.
3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The defendant's assertion that the defendant made an endorsement on each of the Promissory Notes in this case and delivered it to the plaintiff. However, this is a hidden delegation of collection to delegate the collection of the amount of the Promissory Notes. Thus, the plaintiff's claim cannot be complied with.
B. In full view of the reasoning of the entire arguments as to the testimony of the witness E and the Plaintiff, the Defendant, the F, E, and G, etc., each of the loan claims against the Pump Co., Ltd.