(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2016.11.01 2016가단13795

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2016.11.01 2016가단13795

이득상환청구

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The following checks (hereinafter “instant checks”) were issued:

Check No. : E. Check No. 0045304: Par value of the check: 50,000,000 won: May 20, 2016: The branch office of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Branch Office of the Bank of Korea

B. Cho Jae-in delivered the instant check to the Defendant (the trade name before the modification: DD Construction Co., Ltd.), and the Defendant endorsed on the instant check and delivered it to the Plaintiff on February 2, 2016.

C. On June 2, 2016, the Plaintiff presented the instant checks to the Bank of Korea, but was denied due to the lapse of the payment proposal period.

The Plaintiff is the final holder of the instant check.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant: (a) endorsed and transferred the instant check to the Plaintiff by means of settling KRW 50,000,000 on behalf of A, out of KRW 63,00,000,00 for the amount of 63,000 to the Plaintiff; and (b) the instant check was refused to pay.

Therefore, the Defendant, who is an endorser, is obligated to repay to the Plaintiff KRW 50,000,00,000, which is the benefit arising from the refusal of payment of the instant check.

B. The intent of the parties at the time of delivering a bill to the creditor with respect to the performance of the existing obligation in the judgment of this court is divided into cases where the debtor extinguished the existing cause obligation and only intends to continue to exist the existing cause obligation, cases where the debtor delivers the existing cause obligation in the manner of payment for the so-called "for payment" as the method of payment for the existing cause obligation, and cases where the so-called "for the purpose of the security for the payment of the existing obligation" is delivered for the purpose of the security for the payment of the existing obligation. In the absence of special declaration

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2016.09.22 2016나4655

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.12.15 2017가단206280

-서울고등법원 2017.02.16 2016나2055026

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.04.09 2018가합540136

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.11.24 2017가단10656