숨은 어음보증인이 민사보증책임을 지는지 여부
Concealed Guarantee through the Endorsement of the Promissory Notes
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article deals with the concealed aval (guarantee) through the endorsement of promissory notes. Sometimes third party to promissory notes issues, endorses or accepts promissory notes or bills for the debtor of such commercial papers, although he has no substantial business relation with the creditor (holder of the promissory notes or bills). In this case, there can be no argument that the third party is liable to the creditor as the third party who has done a responsible action on the commercial papers. However, it is not clear whether the issuer, endorser or the party who accepted the bills, should be liable as a guarantor under the civil code, in addition to his inherent liability as a issuer, endorser or the party who accepted the bills under the law of commercial papers. Academic theories in thess cases are negative to recognize any additional liability of endorser unedr the civil code, because his action should be interpreted under the promissory note and the law of commercial papers. But the court decision sometimes admitted the liability as a guarantor under the civil code, in addition to the inherent liability as a endorser of the commercial paper. These decisions can not be justified, because the endorser has only done an action within the promissory note. He has never cleary guaranteed any debt of the debtor outside of the promissory note. This writer argues these decisions should be changed.
Abstract
This article deals with the concealed aval (guarantee) through the endorsement of promissory notes. Sometimes third party to promissory notes issues, endorses or accepts promissory notes or bills for the debtor of such commercial papers, although he has no substantial business relation with the creditor (holder of the promissory notes or bills). In this case, there can be no argument that the third party is liable to the creditor as the third party who has done a responsible action on the commercial papers. However, it is not clear whether the issuer, endorser or the party who accepted the bills, should be liable as a guarantor under the civil code, in addition to his inherent liability as a issuer, endorser or the party who accepted the bills under the law of commercial papers. Academic theories in thess cases are negative to recognize any additional liability of endorser unedr the civil code, because his action should be interpreted under the promissory note and the law of commercial papers. But the court decision sometimes admitted the liability as a guarantor under the civil code, in addition to the inherent liability as a endorser of the commercial paper. These decisions can not be justified, because the endorser has only done an action within the promissory note. He has never cleary guaranteed any debt of the debtor outside of the promissory note. This writer argues these decisions should be changed.
참고문헌 (39)
- 加美和照, "숨은 어음보증과 원인채무에 관한 보증, in 별책 ジュリスト 手形小切手法 判例百選", pp.129~ (1990)
- 강위두, "어음배서인의 원인채무에 대한 보증책임", 판례월보, (311), pp.22~23 (1996)
- 古瀨村邦夫, "보증 취지의 어음배서와 원인채무의 보증, in 법률시보(별책) 사법판례 リマクス 제4권", pp.126~ (1992)
- 高窪利一, "法學ガイド, 商法Ⅲ, 手形小切手", pp.285~ (1989), 日本評論社
- 關俊彦, "金融手形小切手法", pp.120~ (1996), 商事法務硏究會
- 김경종, "어음보증, in 어음ㆍ수표법에 관한 제문제(하), 재판자료 제31권", pp.193~ (1986), 법원행정처
- 김문재, "2007년도 어음ㆍ手票에 관한 大法院判例의 動向과 分析", 상사판례연구, 20(4), pp.259~287 (2007), 한국상사판례학회
- 김영태, "어음배서와 원인관계상의 채무의 보증", 대법원판례해설, (29), pp.76~82 (1997)
- 김종기, "보증의 취지로 배서한 자의 원인관계상 채무에 대한 민사상 보증책임의 유무", 판례연구, 5(ㅈ), pp.314~315 (1995), 부산판례연구회
- 丹羽重博, "手形小切手法槪論", pp.220~221 (2007), 法學書院
- 大塚龍兒, "判例時報 제887호", pp.152~ (1987)
- "東京高判 1962. 1. 30. 判決", 金融法學, (201), pp.8~
- "名古屋地裁一宮地判 1964. 6. 30. 判決", 金融法務事情, (382), pp.11~ (1964)
- 小橋一郞, "보증의 취지로 한 배서에 있어서 민사보증추인의 가부, in 상법논집 Ⅲ", pp.251~
- 손주찬, "주해어음수표법", pp.496~ (1993), 한국사법행정학회
- 松代隆, "保證手形の背書と民法上の保證債務の成否", 手形硏究, (159), pp.8~
- 심준보, "어음배서인이 원인채무까지 보증하였는지 판단하는 기준", 대법원판례해설, 통권 : 51, pp.162~ (2004), 법원도서관
- 安永正昭, , 민상법잡지, 104(6), pp.782~ (1991)
- 蓮井良憲, "手形ㆍ小切手法", pp.192~ (1997), 靑林書院
- 塩崎勤, "判例タイアムズ 제790호", pp.57~ (1992)
- 永井和之, "保證の趣旨でする背書における民事保證追認の可否", 金融法務事情, (855), pp.8~ (1978)
- 이철송, "어음ㆍ수법", pp.180~ (2007), 박영사
- "일본 大阪高判 1990. 4. 26. 판결", 金融法務事情, (1262), pp.70~ (1990)
- "일본 최고재판소 1960. 9. 9. 判決", 民集, 14(11), pp.2114~
- "일본 최고재판소 1990. 9. 27. 판결", 民集, 44(6), pp.1007~
- 임재호, "판례법리를 통하여 본 어음법ㆍ수표법상의 몇 가지 문제, in 21세기 상사법의 전개, 정동윤교수 화갑기념논문집", pp.480~ (1999)
- 田邊光政, "最新手形小切手法", pp.237~ (2007), 중앙경제사
- 田中誠二, "手形小切法詳論 下卷", pp.674~ (1968)
- 정동윤, "어음수표법 제5판", pp.388~, 법문사
- 정찬형, "담보목적으로 어음상에 배서한 자의 민법상 보증책임", 판례연구, 4, pp.151~ (1994), 고려대학교법학연구소
- 蓧原勝美, "最高裁判例解說 민사편(1990년도)", pp.329~332 (1990)
- 酒券俊雄, "手形ㆍ小切手法(중요판레해설)", pp.262~ (1985), 學陽書房
- 최기원, "어음수표법", pp.497~ (2008), 박영사
- 최병학, "어음행위와 원인채무의 보증", 법조, 134(12), pp.4~ (1985)
- 최준선, "어음수표법 제6판", pp.367~ (2010), 삼영사
- 椎原國隆, "貸金支拂確保 목적의 어음에 그 사정을 알면서 보증의 목적으로 배서한 것은 소비대차상의 채무도 보증한 것으로 볼 것인가", ジュリスト, (497), pp.116~ (1972)
- 出口正義, "보증의 취지로 한 어음의 배서와 원인채무의 보증", 법학교실, (125), pp.57~ (1991)
- 홍승면, "숨은 어음보증과 원인채무의 보증, in 상사판례연구 Ⅲ", pp.246~ (2006), 박영사
- 後藤勇, "어음의 배서와 원인관계상의 채무보증", 判例タイアムズ, (794), pp.9~10 (1992)