beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 49,200,000 and the annual rate of KRW 6% from April 7, 2014 to April 8, 2016, and the next day.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant issued an electronic Promissory Notes (hereinafter “instant Promissory Notes”) with face value KRW 49.2 million, issuance date on December 27, 2013, maturity date on April 7, 2014, and the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the place of payment, the Bank Trade Center Branch of Enterprise Bank Trade Center, the payee Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “propeach Korea”).
B. On April 7, 2014, the Plaintiff, as the final holder of the Promissory Notes, presented a payment proposal for the Promissory Notes with the maturity date through the Electronic Bill Management Agency, but was refused on the ground of the acceptance.
【Partial grounds for recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The allegations and judgment of the parties
A. According to the fact that the defendant's obligation to pay the bill of this case was recognized, the defendant is obligated to pay the bill of this case to the plaintiff, who is the last holder of the bill of this case, with the amount of KRW 49.2 million and delay damages.
B. (1) The defendant, first of all, issued the bill of this case for the defendant's belief B, C, etc. that the bill of this case may be discounted by the defendant, and the plaintiff was omitted from C's endorsement even though it was received by C. Thus, the bill of this case is a defense that the series of endorsement was omitted.
However, since the series of endorsement is satisfied in the form of form (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da7745, Mar. 9, 199). As seen in the statement of No. 3, as seen in the bill of this case, so long as Korea, the addressee of the bill of this case, is the first endorsement, and D (E), the first endorsement, becomes the second endorsement, and continues without interruption until the plaintiff is the second endorsement, it shall be deemed that there is a series of endorsement. Thus, the defense of this case shall not be accepted without need to further examine.
(2) Next, the defendant presented the bill of this case within the lawful period of presentment for payment.