1. On April 30, 2018, the Seoul Southern District Court recorded the public summons application case No. 2017KaGong261 in the annexed list.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 20, 2017, the Defendant, while holding the checks listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant checks”), was stolen on December 20, 2017. On that day, the Defendant reported the theft of the checks to the Seoul Gangseo Police Station at around 17:50, and reported the accident to C Bank at around 11:15 on the following day.

B. On December 20, 2017, the check of this case was used at the Plaintiff’s E stores on the first floor of the D hotel in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul around December 2017.

C. On December 22, 2017, the Plaintiff presented the said checks to Cbank Seoul Branch, but the Bank refused payment on the ground that the said checks were accident checks.

On December 22, 2017, the Defendant made a statement at the Seoul Gangseo Police Station as a victim, and stated, “I suspended payment at around 11:00 on December 21, 2017.” However, I stated, “I have been phoneed at I have been called “I have received from I have been using a check at I have been using a casino.”

E. On December 26, 2017, the Defendant filed an application for a public summons with the Seoul Southern District Court as Seoul Southern District Court No. 2017KaGong261 on the instant check, and received a nullification judgment on April 30, 2018 (hereinafter “instant nullification judgment”).

2. Determination

A. The holder of securities or certificates lost the possession of securities, etc. without his own intention.

Even if it is later proved that a person has the securities, etc., the former holder shall request the present holder to return it, and the public summons is not allowed. The former holder, as if he knows the holder of the securities, etc., was present on the date of the public summons and stated the cause of application and the purport of seeking nullification judgment, thereby deceiving the public summons court, and the latter is subject to a nullification judgment from the public summons court, it constitutes “when the nullification judgment has been obtained by false or unjust means” under Article 490(2)7 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Supreme Court Decision 97Da16985 delivered on July 25, 1997