(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2016.06.15 2015가단32386

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) 수원지방법원성남지원 2016.06.15 2015가단32386

자동차소유권이전등록절차이행 등

Text

1. The part concerning the claim for confirmation in the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant shall set forth in the separate sheet from the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Request for taking over the transfer registration procedures;

A. The Plaintiffs to be indicated in the claim filed a title trust agreement (hereinafter “instant title trust agreement”) with the Defendant on the automobiles indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant automobiles”) under the name of the Plaintiffs, and the Defendant entered into a title trust agreement with the content that they own. The Plaintiffs completed the title transfer registration in the name of the Plaintiffs on the instant automobiles.

The plaintiffs terminate the title trust agreement of this case to the defendant through the delivery of a duplicate of the complaint of this case. Accordingly, since the title trust agreement of this case has been lawfully terminated, the defendant is obligated to accept from the plaintiffs the procedure for applying for registration of transfer of ownership based on the termination of the title trust agreement of this case on the motor vehicle of this case.

(b) Articles 208(3)2 and 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act of the judgment to recommend confession

2. The plaintiffs seek confirmation as to the legitimacy of the part of the lawsuit of this case that is subject to the duty to pay taxes and public charges, including administrative fines, imposed by the administrative agency on the plaintiffs in relation to the automobile of this case. Since separate appeal procedures are established as to the legitimacy of this part ex officio, the plaintiffs should dispute the legality of the disposition, such as administrative fines, in the appeal procedures. Even if the plaintiffs are rendered confirmation, the judgment is effective only between the plaintiffs and the defendant, but it does not affect the administrative agency that has imposed the administrative fines, and thus, the obligation to pay public charges, etc. already imposed on the plaintiffs is not extinguished. The part of the claim of this case is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the existing apprehension and danger in the plaintiffs' rights or legal status.

Therefore, among the lawsuits of this case, the claim for confirmation.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제150조 제3항

-민사소송법 제208조 제3항 제2호

유사 판례

-수원지방법원안산지원 2017.12.05 2017가단3550

-수원지방법원안산지원 2015.06.05 2014가단36160

-인천지방법원 2015.12.17 2015나13409

-울산지방법원 2016.03.31 2015나4672

-대구지방법원김천지원 2015.10.07 2015가단3644