beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.10.23 2014가단41359

자동차절차인수 등 청구소유권이전등록

Text

1. The part concerning the claim for confirmation of payment obligation, such as fines for negligence, automobile tax, etc., shall be dismissed;

2. The plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Whether the part of the claim for confirmation regarding the obligation to pay administrative fines, automobile tax, etc. is legitimate or not is legitimate or not.

The Plaintiff did not pay the fine for negligence, automobile tax, etc. even when the Defendant acquired and operated the instant automobile registered in the name of the Plaintiff on October 31, 2003. As such, it is sought to confirm that the Defendant is liable to pay the fine for negligence, automobile tax, etc. imposed after October 31, 2003 with respect to the instant automobile.

On the other hand, in the lawsuit for confirmation, the benefit of confirmation is recognized as the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the plaintiff's risk when there is a dispute between the parties about the legal relationship subject to confirmation, and due to that, it is recognized that the plaintiff's legal status is the most effective and appropriate means.

However, even if a judgment is rendered on confirmation of the same contents as the plaintiff sought, the judgment does not become effective against an administrative agency that imposed an administrative fine, automobile tax, etc., and thus, even if it is based on such judgment, the plaintiff's liability to pay the administrative fine, automobile tax, etc. already or to be imposed in the name of the plaintiff is extinguished

(However, the Plaintiff may file a lawsuit seeking unjust enrichment or damages with the Defendant after paying the fine for negligence and automobile tax imposed on the instant automobile. Therefore, the part of the instant lawsuit seeking confirmation is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

2. On October 31, 2003, the plaintiff asserts that since the plaintiff transferred the automobile of this case to the defendant on October 31, 2003, the defendant is obligated to accept the transfer registration procedure of this case on the ground of the acquisition by transfer of the automobile of this day from the plaintiff.

Modern, Modern, this Court.