A. Since the Plaintiff completed a new registration with respect to the automobiles listed in the separate sheet on March 3, 2003 (hereinafter “instant automobiles”), the Plaintiff is registered as the owner in the instant automobile register until now.

B. The Defendant purchased and operated the instant automobile, and purchased the said automobile on June 4, 2004.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, fact-finding results on the place of business registration of Sungnam-si in this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant purchased the instant automobile at least on June 4, 2004, and barring any other special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to take over the transfer registration procedure for the said automobile from the Plaintiff on June 5, 2004.

B. On the other hand, the defendant, around May 2005, purchased the instant vehicle from C and operated it until springing 2006. However, the defendant asserted that since it did not purchase the instant vehicle and did not transfer it to C, it is impossible to accept the plaintiff's request.

However, the transferee of a registered automobile shall file an application with the Mayor/Do governor for the registration of transfer of ownership of the automobile, and in case the transferee of the automobile fails to file an application for the registration of transfer, the owner recorded in the register may file an application for the registration of transfer on behalf of the transferee (Article 12 (1) and (4) of the Automobile Management Act). As long as the Defendant purchased the automobile of this case, the owner is obligated to take over the procedure of transfer registration from

Therefore, it is difficult to accept the defendant's argument.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.