Whether an agricultural cooperative constitutes a "merchant" under Article 163 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act (negative)

The purpose of the business operated by the agricultural cooperatives established under the Agricultural Cooperatives Act is to provide the maximum services that are not discriminated against for its members and do not aim at profit-making. Thus, even if the cooperatives conduct the sales business of the goods produced by its members as part of the business, it cannot be deemed as the merchants of the cooperatives. Therefore, the sales claim of the goods does not constitute the "price for the goods sold by the merchants" under Article 163 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act to which the three-year short

Article 163 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act; Articles 4, 5, and 46 of the Commercial Act; Article 5 of the Agricultural Cooperatives Act

Supreme Court Decision 76Da1865 Delivered on February 22, 1977

Chang-si Agricultural Cooperatives

Defendant

Changwon District Court Decision 98Na6927 delivered on August 12, 1999

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the first ground for appeal

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged the fact that the defendant found in the agricultural products collection center operated by the plaintiff association on March 1993 and concluded an agreement between the non-party who was the plaintiff's complaint and the non-party who was the plaintiff's complaint to make a transaction with the plaintiff association as a intermediary in the above collection center, and then the co-defendant 2 of the court below appointed the local agent in the above collection center as a local agent, and delegate the purchase of goods in the above collection center to the above co-defendant 2 of the court below. From March 11, 1993 to May 4 of the same year, the above co-defendant 2 of the court below accepted the fact that he sent goods, such as soil of 103,569,150 won in total, in the name of the defendant

In light of the records, the above fact-finding by the court below is acceptable, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or incomplete deliberation as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal. The ground of appeal on this point is not acceptable.

2. On the second ground for appeal

The purpose of the business operated by the agricultural cooperatives established under the Agricultural Cooperatives Act is to provide the maximum services without discrimination for its members and not to make profits (Article 5 of the same Act), so even if the cooperatives run the sales business of goods produced by its members as part of the business, it cannot be regarded as the merchants of the cooperatives. Therefore, the sales claim of the goods does not constitute the "price for the goods sold by the merchants" under Article 163 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act to which the short-term extinctive prescription of three years applies.

Under the same purport, the court below rejected the defendant's defense that the claim for the price of the goods in this case against the defendant of the plaintiff union was completed and extinguished by the short-term extinctive prescription of three years, and there is no violation of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the short-term extinctive prescription under Article 163 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Code. The grounds for appeal on

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant who is the appellant. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Yong-woo (Presiding Justice)