A company (“plaintiff”) entered into a standard deposit agreement with a bank (“defendant”) on February 4, 2002. However, on September 7, 2004, after an appraisal revealed that the seal imprint on the fifth reissued deposit bankbook differed from the original, the plaintiff claimed that the withdrawal made using the forged seal was invalid. The plaintiff subsequently filed a claim against the defendant, seeking a refund of the deposit.

DR & AJU represented the defendant, counterarguing that under the commercial statute of limitations, the period for claiming a regular deposit refund is five years from the expiration of the stipulated period, and for a standard deposit refund, five years from the last transaction date. As a result, we contended that the plaintiff’s claim for a deposit refund had expired due to the lapse of the statutory period.

The court dismissed all of the plaintiff’s claims, finding that the suit was filed more than five years after the last transaction date, as evidenced by the records. In the early stages of the litigation, the court was uncertain whether the claim for a deposit refund was subject to the statute of limitations. However, through meticulous legal argumentation, we successfully persuaded the court, which ultimately ruled that the statute of limitations should be calculated from the last transaction date, leading to a favorable outcome for our client.