1. The Defendant amounting to KRW 35 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s 6% per annum from December 27, 2014 to March 12, 2015.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Facts of recognition 1) C Co., Ltd. (the representative D, hereinafter “C”).

) Three copies of the electronic bill (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant bills”) are as follows:

(2) The Plaintiff issued each of the instant bills to the Defendant (E) and the instant bills were issued to the Plaintiff upon endorsement by the Defendant (E). The amount of each of the instant bills was presented to the Plaintiff on October 26, 2014 at the expiration date of the due date of the issuance of the note number of KRW 10,000,000,000 for KRW 2F1,000,000,000 won on October 3, 2014, when the due date of the issuance of the note number of KRW 15,000,000,000 for each of the instant bills issued on December 26, 2014, the Plaintiff was refused to pay as a non-transaction, although the Plaintiff presented a payment proposal for each of the instant bills on December 26, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-4 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The endorsement of the judgment electronic bill requires the endorser’s certified electronic signature (Article 7(6) and 6(3) of the Issuance and Distribution of Electronic Bills Act). Therefore, it is presumed that the holder of an endorsement made on the electronic bill has committed an act of endorsement by the holder of the title deed.

The Defendant, as an endorser of each of the bills of this case, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total sum of KRW 35 million and legal interest and delay damages.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant asserts that since D (the representative director of C and E, and the actual business operator of E) made an endorsement on each of the bills of this case under the name of the defendant without legitimate authority, the defendant is not liable for the endorsement.

B. However, the evidence submitted by the defendant (Evidence No. 1) alone is insufficient to acknowledge the defendant's assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, around July 2, 2014, the Plaintiff issued a discount of electronic bills (amounting to KRW 29 million) composed of the same issuer and endorser as each of the instant bills. However, in the case of the said bills, the settlement was made on September 27, 2014, which was the maturity date, and the transaction of each of the instant bills was also conducted.

Even based on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant.