1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The following facts may be acknowledged by integrating the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1-1 and 2. A.

On April 19, 2007, the defendant issued two copies of the family check with the face value of 5,000,000, the Bank name of the Bank of Korea, the Bank name of the place of payment, and the blank of the place of issuance (C, D).

B. On September 16, 2010, the Plaintiff presented a proposal for payment of each of the above provisional coefficient marks, but was rejected on the ground of forgery.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the plaintiff was issued a provisional coefficient mark issued by the defendant as the security of the loan claim against E, and the payment was presented on September 16, 2010 but refused to be made. Thus, the defendant, who is the issuer of each household check, is obligated to pay 9,30,000,000 won, subtracting the amount of KRW 70,000, out of the total amount of the above check money, and the delay damages therefrom, to the plaintiff, who is the last holder.

B. Unlike the fact that the drawer of a check bears the duty of absolute payment of the amount payable by the underwriter of the bill of exchange or the drawer of the bill of exchange (Article 12 of the Check Act), the drawer is responsible for guaranteeing the payment of the amount payable by the check (Article 12 of the Check Act), and in the case that the check is refused to pay (Article 39 of the Check Act), it is required that the holder of the check shall present the payment system within a lawful period of time by the check stating the legal particulars in Article 1 of the Check

Therefore, there is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff presented the above provisional coefficient within the period of lawful payment (10 days from the date of issuance) and instead, the fact that the plaintiff presented the above provisional coefficient mark on September 16, 2010 after the expiration of the period of payment. Thus, the plaintiff cannot exercise his right of recourse against the defendant, who is the issuer of each household check.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

In addition, the check must be presented for payment within 10 days from the date of its issuance, and the check.