beta
Text
1. As to KRW 110,00,000 and KRW 15,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 15,000 from June 11, 2013, and KRW 95,00,000.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. In the facts of recognition, the Defendant issued and delivered to the Plaintiff, as shown in the attached list, a 22 check (hereinafter “the instant household check”), and the Plaintiff, as a lawful holder, presented three copies of the instant household check, 15,000,000, the sum of which was 15,000,000 or 3, and was refused to pay due to shortage of deposits. Although the Plaintiff presented a payment proposal on June 10, 2013, a total sum of the amounts of the instant household checks 95,00,000 or 19, the sum of which was 95,000,000 or 22, was presented on July 17, 2013, payment was refused due to the lapse of the period.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Evidence A No. 1-22, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the responsibility based on the facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 110,000,000 and KRW 15,000 among them, from June 11, 2013, which is the day following the date when the payment was made, to the remainder of KRW 95,00,000, and from July 18, 2013, which is the day following the day when the payment was made, to October 30, 2014, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint in this case, 6% per annum under the Check Act and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day until the day when the payment was made.
2. The defendant's defense was issued and delivered to the non-party C, who operates the frequency of the household check, for the repayment of the pre-paid price received from the plaintiff. Since the plaintiff agreed not to make a payment of the pre-paid price to the bank, the plaintiff's defense against the above agreement is insufficient to respond to the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking the payment of the pre-paid price.
However, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, 2, and 3, the family check of this case is issued and delivered by the defendant to the plaintiff for the repayment of the livelihood that the non-party C, who operates the frequency of collection, received from the plaintiff, and the plaintiff on July 2, 2013.