Performance of the original obligation of accord and satisfaction;

Inasmuch as a claim to be sent is not extinguished only by the promise for payment in substitutes, the Plaintiff may either claim the payment which is the subject of the original claim, or claim the other payment agreed upon in the promise for payment in substitutes, or may be arbitrarily decided by the Plaintiff, while the Defendant may extinguish all by performing the original payment or performing the other payment agreed upon in the promise for payment in substitutes.

Article 466 of the Civil Act

Agricultural Bank

Park Jong-sik et al.

Busan District Court Decision 59No201,202,203 decided July 3, 1959

The court below recognized that the plaintiff's original claim cannot be claimed and it is reasonable to interpret that the plaintiff can make a claim for the completion of the payment in kind. The plaintiff's claim is rejected, but the original claim is not extinguished as the plaintiff's promise for the payment in kind, as it is duly recognized by the reasoning of the judgment of the court below. Thus, the plaintiff can claim the payment which is the object of the original claim, or claim the payment in kind, or claim the other payment in the promise for the payment in kind, or exercise its right by the plaintiff's own decision. On the other hand, when the plaintiff claims the payment in kind, the plaintiff can claim the other payment in the pre-contract for the payment in kind, and the original claim is actually performed and the original claim is extinguished, and the plaintiff's claim can lose the validity of the pre-contract for the payment in kind by performing the original payment in kind. Therefore, the plaintiff can claim the payment in kind unless the defendant performs the other payment in kind by the pre-contract for the payment in kind, and the court below erred in interpreting the law as to the payment in kind.

Justices Kim Jong-il (Presiding Justice)