(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.05.20 2014나54126

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.05.20 2014나54126

소유권말소등기

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 20, 2012, the Plaintiff completed the transfer of ownership on the instant automobile.

B. On July 26, 2013, the Plaintiff’s sentence D prepared a certificate of automobile transfer concerning the instant automobile (hereinafter “instant certificate of transfer”). The upper end of the said certificate of transfer includes “automobile transfer certificate (for automobile dealer transaction)”, “the Plaintiff’s agent D” in the transferor column, and “C” in the transferee column, and the name and seal of “E high-ranking Defendant” in the car dealer column and the signature of “C” in the transaction amount column, and “3,00,000,000,” and “vehicle price” in the lower end.

C. C deposited KRW 33,00,000 into the Bank G account (hereinafter “instant account”) at the time of the preparation of the instant transfer certificate, and received the registration certificate of the instant vehicle registered by the Plaintiff as its owner from D.

On July 29, 2013, the Defendant completed the registration of transfer of name (hereinafter “registration of transfer of name of this case”) by the purchase on July 28, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence 1, 4 (which includes tentative numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The buyer of the instant vehicle according to the Plaintiff’s certificate of transfer is C, and the EJ is merely a broker, and even if not, K, the representative of EJ, in the name of EJ, bears the actual purchase price, rather than the Defendant, should be deemed the buyer.

In addition, even if the purchase price of the instant vehicle did not pay to the Plaintiff, the Defendant completed the registration of transfer of the instant vehicle under the Plaintiff’s name by forging the Plaintiff’s certificate of transfer of the vehicle, and the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure

B. Defendant C on July 26, 2013.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2015.04.15 2014나54119

-수원지방법원 2017.09.15 2016가단27487

-수원지방법원 2017.01.10 2015가단127878

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.06 2016가단5221767

-광주지방법원 2014.10.28 2013가단511782