The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. The grounds for this part of the facts are as follows: (a) the term "standard amount of credit" in Part 15 of Part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as the "Terms and Conditions of the Guarantee of the Shipping of this case"; and (b) the third part "in the standard amount of credit" in Part 19 of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (1. basic facts). Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. Since this case’s credit guarantee loan is a blanket loan with no specific purpose of financing, it cannot be readily concluded that funds raised through the above loan have been used for the production fund of exported products which were the basis of acquiring export price. Thus, notwithstanding the absence of grounds for preferential treatment in the repayment of loans compared to other kinds of loans, Article 7(1)2 of the Terms and Conditions of Guarantee prior to shipment of this case (hereinafter “the terms and conditions of the contract of this case”) requires a bank to preferentially appropriate the export payment received by the bank as the export payment received by the bank without reasonable grounds. Such terms and conditions of the contract of this case fall under the terms and conditions which are unfair in violation of the principle of good faith and thus are invalid pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Regulation of Terms and Conditions Act (hereinafter “Standard Terms and Conditions Regulation Act”).

B. The terms and conditions of the contract of this case apply to the export price received, Daejeon, or the purchase price of bills of exchange, etc. related to the loan of the credit guarantee book of this case. However, the loan of the credit guarantee book of this case secured by the export credit guarantee certificate of this case was already implemented prior to the purchase of five bills of exchange, which is the maximum amount, and the purchase of the above five bills of exchange is a separate loan which is treated as unrelated to the export credit guarantee of this case, and thus, the defendant issues the five bills of exchange purchase.