beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 100,000,000 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from October 11, 2014 to January 16, 2015.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 2014, the Defendant issued a promissory note with the blank blank space of KRW 100,000 at face value, KRW 20,000 on January 20, 2014, the date of payment, April 30, 2014, each Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, the place of payment, and each place of payment.
(hereinafter referred to as this case’s bill).
In the form of endorsement of the Promissory Notes, the endorsement in the name of C, New Escam, D, and the Plaintiff, each of which constitutes a blank, shall be followed in sequence.
C. At the time of the above payment, the Plaintiff was refused to pay the bill without filling the payee’s column. On October 10, 2014, when the lawsuit of this case was pending, the Plaintiff supplemented the above payee’s column to C and presented it to the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry and shape of evidence A Nos. 1 and 2, purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to Articles 77 and 16, Paragraph 1, of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act, if the last endorsement is a blank endorser, the holder of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes shall be presumed to be a lawful holder, and if the endorsement is followed by another endorsement, the person who made the endorsement shall be deemed to have acquired the Bills by means of a blank endorsement.
In cases where a promissory note is in blank, the addressee is entitled to transfer rights on the Promissory Notes only by simple delivery, and thus the right to claim the payment for the Promissory Notes is granted to the holder of the Promissory Notes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da98818, Apr. 14, 201). According to the above findings, the series of endorsement is recognized from the Defendant, the issuer of the Promissory Notes, to the Plaintiff, and thus, the Plaintiff is presumed to be a lawful holder of the Promissory
Therefore, the Defendant, as the issuer of the Promissory Notes, has the duty to perform the instant obligations since October 11, 2014, as the date following the delivery of a copy of the Promissory Notes as well as KRW 100,000 to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstances.