beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. The Defendants jointly joined KRW 30,000,000 and as to this, from July 27, 2014:
B. Defendant B, C, and.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. As indicated in the separate sheet, Defendant B issued three copies of the Promissory Notes (hereinafter collectively referred to as “ Promissory Notes”) as indicated in the separate sheet. The Promissory Notes were subsequently endorsed and transferred in sequence to Defendant C, Defendant D, Defendant E, and Plaintiff. The Promissory Notes No. 2 transferred in turn to Defendant C, Defendant D, and Plaintiff. The Promissory Notes No. 3 was endorsed and transferred in sequence to Defendant D and the Plaintiff.
B. On September 26, 2014, the Plaintiff presented each of the instant promissory notes at the place of payment, but the payment was refused.
The Plaintiff currently holds each of the Promissory Notes in this case.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, and 3-2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the facts established as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff, the holder of each of the Promissory Notes, and the Defendants, the issuer of the Promissory Notes, and the endorsers of the Promissory Notes, jointly with the Defendants, are liable to pay KRW 30,000,000 at the face value of the Promissory Notes 1 and KRW 45,000 at the face value of the Second Promissory Notes , which is the issuer and endorser of the Promissory Notes , and KRW 45,00,000 at the face value of the Second Promissory Notes , which is the issuer and endorser of the Second Promissory Notes , and the due date for the payment thereof, from November 11, 2014 to the issuer of the third Promissory Notes 39,70,000 won at the face value of the third Promissory Notes , and from October 12, 2014 to the date of the last delivery of the Promissory Notes 6,000 per annum, each of which is calculated as follows:
B. Defendant E’s assertion asserts that Defendant E’s assertion was endorsed on the First Promissory Notes without any cause attributable to Defendant D, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.
Domination, bill act.