(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.02.14 2017가단21783

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.02.14 2017가단21783

어음금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from July 20, 2017 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant issued one copy of the electronic bill (hereinafter “instant bill”) as follows.

Amount of bill No. B: Amount of bill issued on September 5, 2016: The due date of the maturity of the electronic bill: The date of issuance: May 25, 2016: The date of issue: The date of issue of the additional bank issued on May 25, 2016: The issuer of Seopo-dong 772-14, Seopo-dong, Gyeonggi-do.

B. The bill of this case contains the first endorsement dated May 27, 2016 in the name of Nonparty C (D), the second endorsement dated May 31, 2016 in the name of Nonparty C (D), and the third endorsement in the name of the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff presented the bill of this case to the payment bank at the above payment date, but was rejected on the ground of the non-performance of the contract of acceptance.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1's entry, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant, who is the drawer of the Promissory Notes, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, who is the holder of the Promissory Notes, the amount of KRW 100,000,000 per annum from July 20, 2017 to the day of full payment, calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which is the day following the delivery of the copy of the Promissory Notes.

B. The judgment of the defendant's assertion is that the bill of this case was issued by the original defendant for the purpose of financing and requested C to pay the bill discount, and C endorsed and delivered the bill discount to S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, and S, S, S, S, S, the obligee, without performing the promise. The defendant reported the bill discount to P, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, P, S, S, S, P, S, P, S, P, S, P, S, P, P, S, P, P, P, P, P, S, and S, S, P, S, P, P, S, the bill of this case was reported to P, S, P

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2018.05.01 2017나37421

-광주지방법원순천지원 2019.02.28 2017가단78831

-대구지방법원서부지원 2016.04.06 2015가단33773

-서울남부지방법원 2017.05.17 2017가단418

-서울고등법원 2019.12.20 2019노897