logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1997. 5. 28. 선고 96다25050 판결
[약속어음금][공1997.7.15.(38),1976]
Main Issues

If a promissory note with a blank maturity for the payment of continuing goods transaction obligations in the future has been issued, the starting point of the statute of limitations on blank notes

Summary of Judgment

Where a promissory note with a blank maturity is issued for the payment of obligations to be incurred in future transactions of goods, the extinctive prescription of such supplementary note shall run from the time when it is legally possible to exercise rights on the note upon termination of the transactions of goods, unless there are other special circumstances.

[Reference Provisions]

Articles 10, 70, and 77 of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act

Plaintiff, Appellee

Rayman Co., Ltd.

Defendant, Appellant

Gyeong-hee (Attorney Yang Chang-hoon, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul District Court Decision 95Na50133 delivered on April 19, 1996

Text

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

Reasons

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

The court below held that since October 1980, the non-party 3 (hereinafter referred to as the "Tong Textiles") purchased poly-surbane from the plaintiff from the plaintiff. In order to secure the payment of the price of the goods, the court below issued to the plaintiff a promissory note in blank with the date of September 5, 1981, the amount of payment, the addressee, the date of issuance, the place of issuance, and the place of payment. The defendant, as the representative director of the three-luminous, endorsed the above promissory note with the first endorsement at the same time as the above issuance of the said note. The above goods transaction between the plaintiff and the three-luminous fiber was terminated on October 8, 1994. The plaintiff did not have any duty of proof as to the issue date of the above bill as of February 26, 1993; the issue date and payment date as Seoul Metropolitan City; the defendant and the defendant did not have any duty of proof as to the above goods payment amount as 179,770,160,194.

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

The right to fill the blank of a promissory note issued in blank will run from the time when it can exercise its right to fill the blank, and in the event that a promissory note is issued in blank with a maturity for the payment of obligations arising from the continuous transactions of goods in the future as in this case, the extinctive prescription of the right to fill the blank will run from the time when it is legally possible to exercise its right on the promissory note upon the termination of the transactions of goods, barring any other special circumstances. Therefore, the judgment of the court below which deemed the time when the transactions of goods are completed as the starting point of the extinctive prescription of the right to fill the blanksory note

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Final Young-young (Presiding Justice)

arrow
심급 사건
-서울지방법원 1996.4.19.선고 95나50133
참조조문