1. The Defendant’s KRW 6,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from March 1, 2019 to May 7, 2020, respectively.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 27, 2019, the Defendant issued six copies of the cashier’s checks (number C through D, hereinafter “each of the checks of this case”) to Incheon Metropolitan City at the place of issuance and payment (hereinafter “each of the checks of this case”).

B. On March 1, 2019, the Plaintiff presented a payment proposal for each of the instant checks to the Defendant.

C. The Defendant-based E accepted the accident report on each of the instant checks from the Defendant Bank.

On March 13, 2019, the Defendant filed an application with the Incheon District Court for a public summons on the said check, and the said court rendered a decision not to permit the public summons under 2019kdong 33.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the ground of the Plaintiff’s claim

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant, as the drawer of the check of this case, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, who is the holder, 6,000,000 won of the check of this case and 5% per annum from March 1, 2019 to May 7, 2020, which is the date when the Defendant rendered a substantial decision, to dispute with the Defendant from March 1, 2019, and 12% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date when the payment is fully made.

B. As to the Plaintiff’s claim for damages, the amount of damages for health expenses and nonperformance of monetary obligations is calculated by statutory interest rate (Article 397(1) of the Civil Act), and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to pay the check amount.

It is not sufficient to recognize that special damage has occurred in excess of the damages for delay stated in the paragraph, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to this, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff cannot accept the Plaintiff’s claim for the check until the legal relationship of the check of this case is confirmed, since he was unaware of the causal relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

B. A cashier’s check is treated as a cash, which is different from that of cash.