In the endorsement of a promissory note, the validity of the statement of non-payment of the expenses shall be stated in the endorsement made by the endorser and, if only the endorsement is signed, the statement of the terms of the reimbursement of the expenses.

(a) Inasmuch as the endorser of a promissory note has exempted the duty of protest from the duty of protest, the holder shall be presumed to have presented the bill within a lawful time limit;

B. The phrase of the Non-Payment of Expenses requires the signature of the specifyer, but the said signature does not necessarily require the signature of the endorser on the non-payment of expenses, and even if the endorser made an endorsement only, the stipulation of the non-payment of expenses is written in the endorsement, and the signature of the endorser is deemed to have been written in the lawful stipulation of the non-payment of expenses. It does not necessarily require the signature of the endorser in the stipulation of the non-payment of expenses, other than the signature of the endorsement.

Articles 77(1)4 and 46 of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act

E. G. M. M. L.W.

Edives exchange

Seoul High Court Decision 60Do135 delivered on February 21, 1962, Seoul High Court Decision 200Do135 delivered on February 21, 1962

The appeal shall be dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant's attorney are as follows.

According to Article 46 of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act applicable mutatis mutandis to a promissory note pursuant to Article 77 subparagraph 4 of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act, the endorser who has withdrawn from the bill shall enter the bill in question, and shall be exempted from the preparation of the protest or the protest for non-payment to the holder of the bill in order to exercise its retroactive rights. This is because it is difficult to judge the persons entered in the bill if there is no signature, and therefore it is difficult to determine its validity. However, the above signature does not necessarily mean that the word "non-payment of expenses" should be written in the bill itself, and it shall be deemed that the word "non-payment of expenses" cannot be deemed that there is no legal stipulation of non-payment of the bill and the statement of non-payment of the bill as non-payment of the bill as non-payment of expenses, and the defendant's non-payment of the bill as non-payment of the bill cannot be viewed as non-payment of the bill as non-payment of the bill as a legitimate bill, and it shall not be interpreted that it does not affect the defendant's non-payment of the bill.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

The judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Mag-Mag-man (Presiding Judge) Mag-Mag-Mag-ri, the Mag-Mag-ri,