초록 열기/닫기 버튼
This article examines and analyzes the Korean Supreme Court Judgements in 2011 about bill of exchange, note and checks. Especially it focuses on the transfer of a note "in complete satisfaction". In general opinion, the intention that the parties transfer a note for the purpose of the settlement relate to their underlying transaction is fractionated three classes. The first class is the transfer "in complete satisfaction". The second is that "as a conditional payment". The third is that "for the security". In order to be recognized as the case related to the first class, the general view and the judicial precedent make a statement that it need to have the required condition as followed : the special intention or the explicit contract that taking a note discharges the underlying debt when the parties to the transaction agree to this effect. This precedent firstly deals with the transfer of a note in complete satisfaction in Korea. But I think this case has not the special intention or the explicit contract that taking a note discharges the underlying debt. Nevertheless Korean Supreme Court concludes that the transfer of a note in this case is the transfer of a note in complete satisfaction. Therefore I do not agree to this judgement.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
transfer of a note, in complete satisfaction, as a conditional payment, for the security, underlying transaction, underlying debt, explicit contract, special intention
