1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. According to the purport of the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 9 and the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant issued and delivered a promissory note (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) at the face value of KRW 30,000,000 on March 28, 2016, and the due date of July 31, 2016, and the Plaintiff possessed the instant promissory note.

Therefore, the Defendant, who is the issuer of the Promissory Notes, is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff, the holder of the Promissory Notes KRW 30,000,000 as well as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from February 14, 2017 to the day of complete payment, which is the day following the delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The Defendant’s defense of reimbursement of the underlying claim was issued for the payment of the Defendant’s debt, such as the loan, etc., and the Defendant has already repaid KRW 76,330,000 to the Plaintiff’s debt amounting to KRW 59,000,00, and thus, the Defendant asserts to the effect that demanding the payment of the instant promissory note to the Defendant is unreasonable.

The act of a bill must be dealt with separately from the underlying relationship of the receipt of a bill as an unmanned act, and the bill is a security representing rights under a certain bill, regardless of the underlying relationship, so the holder of the bill can exercise his rights under the bill solely on the fact that he is the holder and must prove that he has any real interest.

Therefore, in a case where a receiver of a promissory note claims the issuer for the payment of the promissory note, the causal relationship between the issuance of the promissory note and the circumstances where the underlying obligation was already repaid must be attested by the issuer’s

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da36407, Sept. 20, 2007). In light of the above legal principles, the instant case’s health room and evidence Nos. 1 through 11 (including each base number) are all the arguments.