In cases where a holder of a check requests the drawer to pay the full amount of the check without paying a part of the amount that he/she shall pay in compensation for the check to the endorser, whether the drawer may refuse to pay the part exceeding the money paid.
Even if a holder (the endorsee) of a check claims the drawer for the full amount of the check to be paid in compensation for the check, even though he/she did not pay to the endorser a part of the amount that he/she paid in compensation for the check, this is only limited to the establishment of default between the endorser and the endorser, and as long as the relationship between the endorser and the endorser is not rescinded, the endorser is not obligated to return the check to the endorser. Therefore, the drawer cannot refuse payment for the part exceeding
Article 22 of the Check Act
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 10 million won with an amount equal to 25 percent per annum from November 17, 1983 to the date of full payment.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.
3. Provisional execution may be effected only under the above paragraph (1).
The same shall apply to the order.
Around May 10, 1983, the Defendant issued 10,000 won per share to Nonparty 1 at a face value of 10,000,000 won at a National Bank of Korea Co., Ltd., Ltd., and the issuance date on August 18, 1983, to Non-Party 1, who issued 1,000 shares per share, and issued 1,000,000 Won per share per share to Non-Party 2, and Non-Party 2, as the holder of the above shares per share, issued 1,00,000 won to Non-Party 2, and the non-Party 2 did not have any dispute between the Plaintiff and the above non-party 2, who did not receive the above 20,000 won for non-party 2’s non-party 1’s non-party 1’s non-party 2’s non-party 2’s non-party 2’s non-party 2’s non-party 2’s claim.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff damages for delay under the Special Act on the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc. from November 17, 1983 to the full payment date, which is obviously 25 percent per annum from the day following the day on which the copy of the complaint of this case was delivered to the defendant as requested by the plaintiff, as to the above amount of KRW 10,00,00 for the above number of units and the above amount of the bill of this case. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking the performance of this case is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Article 89 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 6 of the Special Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Article 199 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act,
Judges Kim Jong-hoon