Right to claim reimbursement of benefits from persons who have acquired a check after the expiration of the fixed period;

In a case where a holder claims reimbursement of profits to the drawer on the ground that the right arising out of a check has ceased to exist due to a defect in the procedure, that holder shall be presumed to have duly acquired the check in any case, and the conclusion is not different depending on which the time of the holder’s acquisition of the check is prior to or subsequent to the fixed time.

Articles 21, 19, and 72 of the Check Act

Lee Chang-soo (Attorney Park Chang-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Jeju Bank, Inc.

Seoul High Court Decision 196Na1446 delivered on May 25, 1962

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The Plaintiff’s attorney’s ground of appeal is examined.

In the reasoning of the judgment on the conjunctive claim, the court below held that in a case where the holder of the check, who received the claim for the purchase of the check, has claimed the acquisition of the check within the fixed period of time, unlike the lawful presumption of its acquisition, it would be reasonable to prove the legitimate acquisition route by the holder of the check after the expiration of the fixed period of time, and in this case, the plaintiff could not accept the claim for the redemption of the benefit since the plaintiff did not have any materials to prove this point at all. However, in a case where the holder claims the redemption of the benefit to the drawer on the ground that the right arising from the check was extinguished due to the defect in the procedure, it should be presumed that the holder has properly acquired the check in any case, and therefore, it should be presumed that the conclusion should not be different depending on what is the expiration of the fixed period of time, or whether it is the latter. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the conjunctive claim under Articles 21 and 19 of the Check Act.

The final appeal is reasonable in light of the above, and thus, the judgment on the other arguments is reversed.

In accordance with Article 406 of the Civil Procedure Act prior to the amendment, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the Seoul High Court which rendered the judgment in order to review whether the plaintiff acquired the right to redemption of benefit pursuant to Article 72 of the Check Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge)