beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 6, 2017, the Defendant issued one copy of an electronic Promissory Notes with a maturity of KRW 100,000,000 at par value, and as of September 30, 2017, and divided into two copies of a promissory Notes with a face value of KRW 50,000 per day.
B. One of the foregoing divided bills (hereinafter “instant electronic bill”) was issued as the payee on July 6, 2017. On the same day, D Co., Ltd. E (hereinafter “E”), Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”); on July 17, 2017, Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”); and on September 4, 2017, endorsed and transferred in succession to the Plaintiff.
C. On July 20, 2017, the Defendant filed an accident report on the instant electronic bill with GJ branch on the ground of e-mail, and the Plaintiff presented a payment proposal for the instant electronic bill to the final holder, but was in default on October 10, 2017.
[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence A, Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6 (Partial Number omitted), and the purport of the whole pleadings]
2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff is deemed to have lawfully acquired the right to the electronic bill of this case, barring any special circumstances, and the defendant asserts that the former endorser is the agricultural company H, therefore, the endorsement of the electronic bill of this case is not continuous, or all E and F, which are the plaintiff's former endorser, are not the legitimate holder of the bill, and thus the plaintiff did not acquire the right to the electronic bill of this case and the bona fide acquisition is a problem. However, in light of the provisions of Article 7 of the Act on the Issuance and Financing of Electronic Bills providing for the method of endorsement of the electronic bill, it cannot be deemed that the endorsement of the electronic bill of this case is not continuous, and according to the above facts of recognition, according to the above facts of recognition, all EF acquired the right to the electronic bill of this case prior to the plaintiff's report of acceptance of the death, this part of the defendant's assertion is with merit.