logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1970. 12. 29. 선고 70다2425 판결
[보증채무금][집18(3)민,435]
Main Issues

The case of misunderstanding the legal principles on the performance of the employee's clerical work.

Summary of Judgment

Payment guarantee in the checks issued by another person is closely related to the conduct of business.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 756 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff-Appellant

Kim Jong-Un

Defendant-Appellee

Seoul Special Metropolitan City Agricultural Cooperatives

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 70Na79 decided September 29, 1970, Seoul High Court Decision 70Na79 decided September 29, 1970

Text

We reverse the original judgment.

The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

Reasons

We examine the second ground for appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the plaintiff's claim that the payment guarantee act on each check issued by the non-party 2 was related to the non-party 1's execution of the business of the defendant's association, which was the non-party 1's deposit office of the defendant's non-party 1, and thus the defendant's association's payment guarantee act as the non-party 1's employee should compensate for the plaintiff's damage caused by the above payment guarantee act. However, according to the defendant's legal brief as stated on the first day of June 23, 1970 as stated on the first day of the court below, according to the defendant's legal brief as of June 23, 1970, it can be seen that the defendant's deposit office of the defendant's association has the authority to provide the loan business even to the head of the deposit office of the defendant's association. Thus, the court below cannot be viewed as a close relation to the payment guarantee business as stated in its decision. Thus, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the remaining legal principles.

The issue is with merit on this point, and the original judgment is reversed by omitting an explanation of the argument on other appeal, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Park Jae-dong (Presiding Judge)

arrow