위조배서의 입증책임 - 대법원 1993. 8. 24. 판결 93다4151에 대한 평석 -

Abstract

The Supreme Court of Korea released the famous “Forged Indorsement” -Case in the year of 1993. The time was gone and the case is now very old, but this case has yet a significant meaning in the law of negotiable instrument in Korea. The majority justices of Supreme Court said that the holder of instrument as plaintiff has the burden of proof on the authenticity of a signature. They reasoned it through refining the scope of a rebuttable presumption by Art. 16 (1) Korean Law of Negotiable Instrument (Unified Geneva Law on Negotiable Instrument and Check). In consequence, the valid establishing a liability of each signer on the bill should be proved by the plaintiff. In contrast, the minority justices deny the results of the majority. Key issue on this case lies on the scope of presumption by Art. 16 (1). The author emphasizes the difference between the right ('Recht') and the entitlement (‘Berechtigung’).