자동차이전등록말소등
1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) on the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.
2.In addition, a new trial shall be added.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the first sentence of “1. A”, the last sentence of “2. A. (1)”, and the last sentence of “4.” are as follows; and (b) except for adding the following judgments, the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Any part of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance cited as such;
A.1. The first sentence of “1. A” shall be added to the following:
Around February 1, 2015, the plaintiff is the motor vehicle listed in the annexed sheet in which the plaintiff and the plaintiff's spouse own 1/2 shares in the SKk, which is the medium and direct trade Internet site of the second direct trade (hereinafter referred to as "the motor vehicle of this case").
(B) publish a notice stating that he will sell 29 million won or more.
(b) ‘2. A.
(1)The last sentence of paragraph (1) shall be written in the following manner:
"Therefore, the defendant must cancel the registration of transfer of ownership as to the plaintiff who is the right holder of the 1/2 of the instant vehicle, which is the right holder of the instant vehicle.
(i) "";
(c) the last sentence of "4.4." shall be drawn up as follows:
"Therefore, the defendant shall carry out the procedure for the cancellation of the registration of the transfer of ownership against the plaintiff who claims based on the act of preservation as the 1/2 of the automobile of this case as the 1/2 of the right holder of the right to the automobile of this case (as long as the plaintiff's primary
3. Determination as to the Defendant’s assertion added in the trial room
A. With respect to the primary and conjunctive counterclaim claim, Article 107 of the Civil Code applies mutatis mutandis even if the Plaintiff, on the premise that he/she granted the Plaintiff the right to sell the instant vehicle on behalf of the Plaintiff, even if the Plaintiff, even though he/she did not have the right to sell the instant vehicle on behalf of the Plaintiff, Article 107 of the Civil Code applies mutatis mutandis.