2017년도 어음·수표에 대한 대법원판결의 동향과 분석 -2017. 2. 3. 선고 2016다41425 판결을 중심으로-

Abstract

This article examines and analyzes the Korean Supreme Court Judgements in 2017 about Bill of Exchange, Note and Checks. Especially it focuses on the Korean Supreme Court case 2017. 2. 3., 2016da41425. This case has the issue which is related the disputes incurred or to be incurred from or in connection with the accident notice deposit. the issues are whether the note drawer must pay the interest or the damages for delay as well as the accident notice deposit. The above issues are directly related to how to decide the essential nature or legal characteristics of the accident notice deposit and contract for disposal of accident notice deposit. The precedents of Supreme Court and majority opinions see the above as the contract for the third party, while minority opinions see it as the contract for deposit for reimbursement or the special contract for the third party. The last theory is my opinion. By the majority opinion, the note drawer must pay the interest or the damages for delay from the law day of the note. By the theory of the contract for deposit for reimbursement, the note drawer need not to pay the interest or the damages for delay. But by the theory of the special contract for the third party, the note drawer must pay the interest or the damages for delay from the presentation date that the proper holder of the note submit the evidence papers to the paying bank. In this case, the Supreme Court concluded that the note drawer must pay the interest or the damages for delay from the law day of the note by the majority opinion. But this article asserts that the note drawer must pay the interest or the damages for delay from the presentation date that the proper holder of the note submit the evidence papers to the paying bank by the theory of the special contract for the third party.