The time when the repayment takes effect in case of calculation by the second level mutual account method in current account transactions.

In the current account transaction, the amount deposited in the account of the customer's current account transaction shall be determined by the evidence, and even if the so-called account account settlement method is used for the repayment of the current account from time to time when it is not necessary to wait for the settlement of the current account due to the expiration of the contract period for the current account transaction, and even if the account settlement method is used for the settlement of the current account from time to time when it is not appropriate for the payment of the current account, i.e., the effect of the repayment of the deposit and the withdrawal on the date of the deposit, or if there is a balance, it shall be determined by the evidence, and it shall not be deemed that the so-called account settlement method is effective when the payment is made in the bank account

Article 476 of the Civil Act, Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff

Seoul Trust Bank Co., Ltd., Counsel for defendant-appellee

Seoul High Court Decision 83Na3378 delivered on May 31, 1984

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the above provisional attachment was issued by the non-party 2 to the above non-party 82Ka18368 on May 18, 1982, and the non-party 2 to the above non-party 2's separate deposit account amount of KRW 2,50,000 on May 20 of the same year after receiving a ruling of provisional attachment against the non-party 2's deposit account amount of KRW 40 on May 18, 1982; the non-party 2's separate deposit account amount of KRW 82Ga379 on December 10 of the same year; the non-party 2's separate deposit account amount of KRW 40 on the non-party 2's separate deposit account amount of KRW 50 on the non-party 2's separate deposit account amount of KRW 50,000,000 on May 18, 1982.

However, the court below's decision that the account settlement method of the bank in the current account transaction is the so-called account settlement method described in the current account transaction as the account settlement method of the bank in the current account transaction must be confirmed by evidence if it is the account settlement method of the bank from time to time when it is not necessary to wait for the end-of-day account settlement due to the expiration of the contract period of the current account transaction, and it is the account method of the bank from time to time when it is used for the settlement of the current account transaction, it shall not be deemed that the account settlement method of the bank from time to time is the account settlement method, nor shall it be accepted as the account settlement method, and if there is a balance after settling the deposit and the withdrawal on the date of the deposit, if it is not appropriated for the repayment immediately after the deposit is made at any time, it shall not be deemed that the account settlement method of the so-called account settlement method has expired immediately after the deposit was made.

Meanwhile, according to the evidence evidence No. 4 cited by the court below, it is not reasonable that the monthly obligation of the Nonparty against the Defendant was KRW 20,355,450 on June 30, 1982, and KRW 22,50,000 on the current account of the Nonparty’s current account on the same day. However, the amount of KRW 22,50,000, which is the same amount as the amount deposited on the same day, was withdrawn as the settlement amount of the promissory note issued by the Nonparty on the same day, and eventually, the amount of KRW 22,50,500,000, which is the same amount as the amount deposited on the same day, can be identified as the fact that the monthly obligation of the Nonparty against the Defendant on the same day during the last day surveillance.

If the account practice of a bank in current account transactions is not required to reduce the closing time of the relevant day and it is appropriated for the repayment of the current monthly obligation to the non-party defendant immediately, such as the time of the original adjudication, the amount of the current monthly obligation to the non-party defendant as of the date of the original adjudication, but the new monthly obligation has been incurred due to the new month of the same day. However, if there is a balance after calculating the deposit amount on the day and the withdrawal amount based on the closing time of the relevant day, if there is any shortage, the shortage automatically within the limit of the limit of the current monthly obligation, within the limit of the amount of the current monthly account transaction, the current monthly obligation to the non-party defendant shall continue to exist.

Pursuant to the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 6, the current account is not appropriated for the repayment of the current account by calculating the amount of monthly credit from the current account at each time, but it appears that the balance of the current account or the current account is fixed only when the current account is finally settled after all bills and checks presented on that day are settled. If the court below, as of June 30, 1982, issued the current account of the non-party as of June 30, 1982, issued the current account of the non-party to the same non-party as the current account of the non-party, which was KRW 22,50,000,000, which was over KRW 222,500,000, which was over KRW 15,444,83, which was against the defendant of the non-party as of May 20, 1982, which affected the conclusion of the judgment of the court below as to the current account of the non-party's automatic account of this case.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Yoon Yoon-tae (Presiding Justice)