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. According to the record as to the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal, since the document of lawsuit, including a duplicate of the complaint of the first instance, and the original copy of the judgment, are served to the defendant by means of service by public notice, and the defendant becomes aware of the fact that the defendant was not aware of the lawsuit of this case and the judgment of the court of first instance, it can be recognized that the subsequent appeal of this case was filed within two weeks from the date of

2. According to the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the defendant issued one promissory note to the plaintiff on August 22, 1997 (the amount of KRW 17,160,00, and the due date (the due date) September 10, 1997, the place of issuance, the place of payment, and the due date (the due date). Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the above amount of KRW 17,160,000 to the plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

The Plaintiff claimed damages for delay calculated at the statutory rate for the period from September 11, 1997 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the due date. However, the Plaintiff’s delayed liability for the payment of the amount of the bill can only be incurred only when the payment was presented (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 80Da863, Dec. 8, 1981). However, there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff made a lawful payment proposal to the Defendant. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay is groundless.

3. Whether the extinctive prescription expires;

A. The Defendant asserts that the statute of limitations defense by the Defendant had expired since the Plaintiff filed a claim on the said bill after the lapse of three years from the maturity of the instant bill.

The extinctive prescription of a claim under a promissory note against the issuer is completed unless it is exercised for three years (Articles 77(1)8 and 70(1) of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act). The extinctive prescription of a claim under a promissory note against the issuer is in progress from the date of maturity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Da33769, Dec. 10, 2004). The fact that the maturity (payment date) of the Promissory Notes is September 10, 1997.