logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원상주지원 2017.08.23 2017가단710
구상금
Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant borrowed a promissory note from C as collateral around August 2005 at the end of September, 2005, setting the maturity of 40 million won as the end of September 2005.

However, the defendant's failure to repay the borrowed money on behalf of the plaintiff and urged the defendant to pay the borrowed money on a several occasions, and the defendant did not pay the borrowed money up to 2012 until now.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 40 million won and damages for delay.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant borrowed KRW 40 million from C

The plaintiff's assertion is without merit, since there is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff made a substitute payment.

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit. According to each description or form of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, it can be acknowledged that Daesung Construction Co., Ltd. issued one promissory note to the Defendant. The Defendant’s endorsement on the said promissory note and delivered it to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s endorsement on the said promissory note and delivery to C, and the Plaintiff’s presentation on the due date of payment of the promissory note, but the payment was refused. The Plaintiff’s assertion may be prejudicial to the purport that the Defendant exercises his right of recourse as the endorser after the payment to C.

However, the extinctive prescription for the right of recourse against other endorsers of an endorser is complete unless it is exercised within six months from the date on which the endorser redeems the bill of exchange or from the date on which the endorser institutes a lawsuit. Even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, it is obvious that the lawsuit in this case was brought six months after the date on which the Plaintiff redeems the bill. As such,

C. Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow