beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 10 million and the Plaintiff’s KRW 6% per annum from August 11, 2016 to October 5, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On August 10, 2016, the Defendant issued to the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor a cashier’s check (the check No. A; hereinafter “instant check”) with the face value of KRW 100 million, the issuing bank’s main office, the main office of the Nonghyup Bank, and the paying Nonghyup Bank.
B. On August 10, 2016, the Plaintiff exchanged the instant checks to Nonparty B, a customer, with chips at the casino business site operated by the Plaintiff, and presented the check to Nonparty B on August 11, 2016, and was refused to pay the check on the ground that the accident occurred on August 12, 2016.
C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff filed a report on the right to the instant check on November 18, 2016 in the public summons procedure filed by the Intervenor joining the Defendant as the Court No. 2016Kano15, and the said court rendered a judgment of nullification on December 27, 2016 that the Plaintiff’s right to the instant check is withheld and the instant check is invalidated.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 100 million at the face value of the instant check to the Plaintiff, who is the holder of the instant check, unless there are special circumstances, as the drawer of the instant check.
B. On the part of the Defendant’s Intervenor’s assertion 1), the Defendant’s Intervenor asserts that the Plaintiff was unable to bona fide acquire the instant check since the Plaintiff was grossly negligent in not verifying whether the instant check was normal checks in acquiring the instant check from an unentitled person B. 2) The Defendant’s Intervenor’s assertion that the Defendant did not bona fide acquire the instant check, despite the circumstances that may give rise to doubt of the transferor’s substantive non-rights by the transferor, its bill, and check itself, when considering that it was based on ordinary trade standards in acquiring the instant check and check.