logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2015.06.05 2014가단132102
청구이의
Text

1. Promissory notes No. 300, 2014, dated April 29, 2014, issued by the Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff, against the Plaintiff, is a law firm citizen.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff: (a) the Plaintiff made the Plaintiff sign and seal a promissory note in blank form without any explanation; and (b) issued the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression; (c) the Plaintiff asserts that the deed of promissory note No. 1 written in the name of the Plaintiff is invalid, on the ground that there was no intention to delegate the issuance of a promissory note or to prepare a notarial deed

2. Determination

A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts can be acknowledged in the testimony of the witness C, including evidence Nos. 6, evidence Nos. 1 to 3, and evidence No. 1 to 3.

1) On January 22, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) drafted a cash custody certificate stating that “40,000,000 won shall be repaid to the Defendant by March 31, 2014; (b) the Defendant demanded C to provide a security for the said obligation, as C did not pay the said money by the due date; (c) around April 2014, C sought the Plaintiff to the effect that “A will bring about the signing of a blank bill only to the customer if it is necessary for the project; and (d) was signed by a promissory note and the power of attorney in blank to the effect that C was signed by the Plaintiff.”

C The said Promissory Notes stated that the said Promissory Notes amounting to KRW 43,00,000, the issue date on November 6, 2013, and the due date on May 30, 2014, and affixed the seal impression received from the Plaintiff.

C, along with the Plaintiff, issued the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression to the Dong Office, and then issued the said promissory note and the certificate of personal seal impression to the Defendant.

3) On April 29, 2014, the Defendant’s authentication of the said Promissory Notes received by a notary public from a law firm’s citizen from C under the No. 300 of the 2014 Deed from C (hereinafter “instant Notarial Deed”).

B.

Judgment

According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff listened to the statement from C that the signature of the Promissory Notes will bring about to the customer, and signed the Promissory Notes, and issued the seal impression and the seal impression to C.

arrow