1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of this court's judgment citing the judgment of the court of first instance is set forth in Section 4. A of the judgment of the court of first instance.

The part of the evidence of the first instance judgment is added to the "written evidence Nos. 9 through 13", and the part of the 8th to the "Plaintiff" as stated in the second to the "Plaintiff" as stated in the following 2. The defendant added the judgment as to the additional claim by this court as stated in the following 3. Thus, the part corresponding to the defendant of the first instance judgment is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The part of the check written after repair 2. 【Plaintiff’s delivery of food such as ducks to A, and the above check for the payment of the price of supply from A on July 27, 2013 (hereinafter “instant check”).

) Upon receiving endorsement, Korea Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea Co., Ltd.”) has received endorsement, and Korea Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea Co., Ltd”).

() On August 19, 2013, food such as original meat was supplied to Korea, and the Plaintiff endorsed the instant check to Korea branch for the payment of the price of goods. When the instant check was rejected on the grounds of non-transaction on September 25, 2013, the Plaintiff paid the relevant food price to Korea branch and recovered the instant check. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant, the endorser of the instant check, is jointly with B and A, the drawer, and thus, recovered the instant check.

3. Judgment on the defendant's additional assertion

A. The defendant asserts that the defendant cannot be held liable for the payment of the check amount only to the defendant, holding the representative director B, who is the drawer of the check B, exempted from liability.

However, inasmuch as Company B and its representative director are juristic persons and natural persons separate from each other, barring any special circumstance, C cannot pay to the individual the amount equivalent to the check occurred by Company B with respect to the check, and the obligation of Company C is not affected by the Defendant’s duty of recourse to the check as the endorser. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is with merit.