2019년 상법총칙·상행위법 및 어음·수표법 판례의 동향과 분석
Comment on the Court judgment related to general Regulations-Commercial Activity of commercial law and Bills of Exchange-Promissory Notes Act and Checks Act in 2019
박인호(전남대학교)
33권 2호, 3~42쪽
초록
2019년에 선고된 판결 중 상법총칙·상행위나 어음·수표법과 직접 관련된 쟁점을 다룬 대법원 판결은 많지가 않다. 2019년도에 선고된 대법원 판결 중 상법총칙·상행위와 관련된 쟁점에 대하여 판시한 판결은 3건이 확인되었는데, 그중 2건은 임금 미지급에 따른 지연이자의 산정과 관련하여 임금채권이 상사법정이율을 적용할 수 있는 상행위로 인한 채권인지 여부가 쟁점이 되었고, 나머지 1건은 금융리스업자가 공급자로부터 적합한 금융리스물건을 수령할 수 있도록 협력할 의무를 부담하는 외에 독자적인 금융리스물건 인도의무 또는 검사·확인의무를 부담하는지 여부가 쟁점이 되었다. 그 밖에 하급심에서도 상사법정이율의 적용과 관련하여 상행위로 인한 채권인지 여부가 쟁점이 되었던 판결이 확인되었다. 어음·수표법과 직접 관련된 쟁점에 대하여 판시한 대법원 판결은 1건이 확인되었는데, 해당 판결에서는 어음상 권리발생의 요건사실에 대한 주장·증명책임의 소재 여부가 쟁점이 되었다. 총칙·상행위편에서 금융리스업자의 리스물건에 대한 인도의무 및 검사·확인의무 부담 여부에 대한 판결은 금융리스거래의 형식적 측면보다는 리스물건 매수를 위한 금융의 제공이라는 금융리스의 본질을 확인하고, 그 본질에 근거하여 금융리스업자의 의무를 판단하였다는 점에서 의미가 있다. 한편, 어음·수표의 권리에 대한 증명책임에 대한 판결은 제1심에서 원고의 청구가 인용되어 판결이 형식적으로 확정된 후 추완항소에 의하여 열린 항소심에서 증명책임이 전환되는지에 대하여 판단한 새로운 판결이라는 점에서 의미가 있다.
Abstract
There are not many Supreme Court judgement sentenced in 2019 that deal with issues directly related to general Regulations-Commercial Activity of commercial law and Bills of Exchange-Promissory Notes Act and Checks Act. In the Supreme Court's judgement sentenced in 2019, three cases were found that argued about issues related to general Regulation-Commercial activity of Commercial law. Two of which were related to calculation of late interest due to unpaid wages then, the issue was whether the wage claim is a commercial claim that can apply the commercial statutory interest rate. And the other one cooperates so that the financial leasing business can receive the appropriate financial lease property from the provider. In addition to bearing the obligation, the issue was whether to bear duty of delivery and to inspect or verify its own financial leased property. Other lower courts also confirmed the decision that the issue was whether the claim was due to a commercial act in connection with the application of the commercial statutory interest rate. One Supreme Court judgement on issues directly related to Bills of Exchange-Promissory Notes Act and Checks Act was confirmed. The judgement’s issue was who have to claim and prove the occurrence of the right on the bill. In the General Regulations-Commercial activity, the judgment on financing lease confirms the essence of the financing lease that is the providing finance for purchasing the lease item. And the judgement confirms whether a financing lease business is obliged to deliver lease item and whether to undertake the inspection and verification obligations The judgement is meaningful in that it judged the obligation based on essence of finance lease. On the other hand, the judgment on the burden of proof for the rights of bills and checks confirms that the burden of proof does not shift in appeals court opened by an additional appeal after the plaintiff's request was cited in the first instance and the decision was formally confirmed. The judgement is meaningful in that it is the new judgement determined the issue.
- 발행기관:
- 한국상사판례학회
- 분류:
- 법학