The drawee is whether the holder of a bill in blank has transferred his/her rights to the bill, in cases where the bill has been endorsed without filling the blank, but the requirements for endorsement are not satisfied (negative)

The drawee refers to the holder of a bill in blank may legally transfer his rights to the bill by delivering the bill without filling the drawee's blank. However, even if the bill is endorsed in the first endorsement column, even if it was delivered without filling the drawee's blank, the right to the bill is legally transferred, and if the endorsement does not meet the requirements of endorsement, the right to the bill is not legally transferred (this case is the case where the holder of the bill in blank signed the bill without filling the drawee's blank blank, and is distributed in violation of the first endorsement method of Article 13 of the former Bills, and the last holder of the bill acquired by means of endorsement of Articles 2 and 3, which meet the requirements of endorsement, was supplemented in the name of the first endorsement, but the defect in the seal of the first endorsement is not supplemented).

Articles 13 and 14 of the former Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act (amended by Act No. 5009 of Dec. 6, 1995)

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Jindo;

Dong Country Co., Ltd.

Daejeon District Court Decision 96Na1243 delivered on August 30, 1996

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The drawee refers to the holder of a bill in blank may legally transfer his rights to the bill by delivering the bill without filling the drawee's blank. However, even if the endorsement was made by himself in the first column of endorsement, the right to the bill is legally transferred only if the endorsement is a valid endorsement satisfying all the requirements of endorsement. If the endorsement does not meet the requirements of endorsement, the right to the bill can not be legally transferred.

In the Supreme Court Decision 94Da9764 delivered on April 26, 1996, the Court held that the right on the bill can be transferred by delivering only the bill in blank. The purport of the above is that the right on the bill is legitimate in the case where the holder of a bill in blank delivers it without filling the blank and without filling the blank, and the right on the bill is not legally transferred in the case where the holder of the bill delivers it without filling the blank, even if the bill delivered by endorsement, but the endorsement does not meet the requirements of endorsement, the right on the bill is not legally transferred.

If the facts of this case are as determined by the court below, the endorsement of the Noh Jeong-il has no effect, and therefore, even if the Noh Jeong-il received the Promissory Notes in this case from the Noh Jeong-hee, the said New Chang-il cannot be legally transferred the rights of the said Promissory Notes.

The judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and the judgment of the court below cannot be said to have made a decision contrary to the above party members' precedents. There is no reason for argument

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)