The validity of checks issued for discount by the regular directors of special agricultural cooperatives to persons other than the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation.

According to the provisions of Article 125(3) of the Agricultural Cooperatives Act, a special agricultural cooperative may borrow funds only from the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation in order to achieve its purpose, and may not borrow funds from other agencies or individuals. Thus, an act of issuing a check of the name of the cooperative to discount regular business of a special agricultural cooperative is an act of bearing debts belonging to the borrowing, which is null and void as it violates the above Acts and subordinate statutes, and thus, the holder of a check may not demand the cooperative

Article 125(3) of the Agricultural Cooperatives Act

Plaintiff

○ ○ Won Arts Cooperatives

Cheongju District Court Decision 85Na178 delivered on February 7, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the first instance judgment as cited by the court below, the non-party acknowledged the fact that the non-party, who was in charge of the affairs such as the issuance of checks while the non-party was an executive director of the defendant cooperative established under the Agricultural Cooperatives Act and was in charge of the affairs such as the issuance of checks, using the check paper and official seal of the defendant cooperative, the issuer association, the issuance date of 6,450,000 won at par value, 00 ○○ ○○ ○ ○, the payer, the agricultural cooperative, and the agricultural cooperative branch of the ○○○ ○○ Gun branch, issued a copy of the check number per bearer 27 September 1984. According to the provisions of Article 125(3) of the Agricultural Cooperatives Act, the special agricultural cooperative can borrow funds only from the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation to achieve its purpose, and it is not possible to borrow funds from other agencies or individuals. Thus, the above non-party's claim for the above judgment is justified in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the above 20-Appellant's claim for damages.

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

Justices Yoon Yoon-tae (Presiding Justice)