Although a promissory note exercises its right of recourse prior to maturity, if the duty of recourse is not actually fulfilled until the date of closing the argument after maturity, the amount of recourse.

The amount of the bill at the maturity prior to the settlement of the bill shall be reduced by the discount. However, even if the maturity prior to the settlement of the bill is the district prior to the settlement of the bill, the amount of the bill shall not be deducted from the face value of the bill, but the legal interest shall be added only after the maturity, if the obligation to pay the bill has not been actually fulfilled until the closing of the argument.

Articles 77(1)4 and 48(2) of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act

prescribed rights

Kim Young-young

1. The defendant shall pay 30,000,000 won to the plaintiff, on condition that with respect to 20,000,000 won out of the above money, 20,000 won shall be paid from November 12, 1993; and with respect to 10,000,000 won, 25 percent per annum from the 30th of the same month to the date of full payment.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 30 million won with 25 percent interest per annum from the day after the copy of the complaint of this case was served to the day after the completion of the complaint of this case.

1.The following facts shall be subject to no dispute between the Parties:

A. On September 3, 1993, Nonparty 1 issued to Nonparty 1 a promissory note with a face value of KRW 20,000,000 in the attached Table Nos. 1 to Nonparty 1. The above new letters were issued to the Defendant. The Defendant, the Defendant, to Nonparty 1, exempted the Plaintiff from drawing up each payment refusal certificate, and subsequently endorsed and transferred the above promissory note in succession. The Plaintiff, as the final holder of the last right on October 18, 1993, was seeking payment to the National Bank, which was the place of payment. However, the payment was refused due to lack of deposit.

B. On September 3, 1993, the above non-party (State) issued one copy of a promissory note with a face value of KRW 10,000,000,000, which is stated in the attached Table Nos. 2 (2) to the above New Year. The above new letter to the defendant, the defendant exempted the plaintiff from the preparation of each protest, and subsequently endorsed and transferred the above promissory note in sequential order. The plaintiff as the last holder, who was the plaintiff, was in default of all other promissory notes in the issuance of the previous Note Nos. 1, 1993, and was refused to pay to the National Bank prior to the date of payment of the above Promissory note No. 30, Nov. 30, 1993.

According to the above facts, the plaintiff can exercise the right of recourse against the defendant, who is the endorser of each of the above promissory notes, and in the case of a recourse prior to maturity, the amount of recourse must be the amount reduced by discount from the amount of the bill. However, even though the claim of this case against the promissory note is an exercise of the right of recourse prior to maturity, as long as it is obvious in the purport of the pleading that the obligation of recourse has not been actually performed until the closing of argument in this case, which is after the date of the above payment, even though it is the exercise of the right of recourse prior to maturity, the amount of recourse should be the amount calculated by deducting the interim interest separately from the amount of

2. The defendant asserts that it cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim of this case due to lack of financial capability, but it is not a legal ground to refuse the plaintiff's claim, and thus, it cannot be accepted.

3. Thus, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 11,50,000 (3,00,000 +8,500,000) total face value of two copies of the above Promissory Notes, and as to KRW 20,00,00,00 after the payment date, the defendant shall be liable to pay to the plaintiff the amount at the rate of KRW 25,000 per annum, which is the interest rate under Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from November 30, 1993 to each full payment date, and as to KRW 10,00,00,00 on the record that the copy of the Promissory Notes in this case was served on the defendant after the payment date, as requested by the plaintiff, as to KRW 20,00,00,00 after the record, it shall be from November 23, 1993 to each full payment date. Thus, the plaintiff's prior claim shall be accepted within the remaining scope of recognition, and is dismissed.

Judge Lee Jong-hoon