logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.01.27 2015가단32863
자동차소유권이전등록절차인수 등
Text

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

2. The plaintiff's remainder.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s determination as to the legitimacy of the part concerning the claim for confirmation of payment of fines for negligence, automobile tax, etc. among the instant lawsuit is sought by the person liable for payment of fines for negligence, automobile tax, etc., which occurred from October 31, 201 with respect to the instant automobile

Even if the plaintiff and the defendant confirm that they have the obligation to pay the above administrative fine, etc. ex officio, the judgment is only effective between the plaintiff and the defendant, and it does not exempt the plaintiff from the obligation to pay the administrative fine, automobile tax, etc. to the state or the government office which is subject to the payment of the administrative fine, automobile tax, etc. Thus, the plaintiff's claim for the confirmation of the obligation to pay the defendant against the defendant cannot be a valid and appropriate means to eliminate the plaintiff's present unstable status. Thus, this part of the claim does not have a benefit

2. On October 31, 201, the Plaintiff alleged that the ownership of the instant motor vehicle should be transferred to the Defendant since it sold the instant motor vehicle to the Defendant on October 31, 201, and thus, according to the fact inquiry results with respect to the Mine Office, the fact that the instant motor vehicle insurance was purchased in the Defendant’s name from March 5, 2012 to March 5, 2013 is recognized, but it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the other party who sold the instant motor vehicle was the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. If so, the part concerning the claim for confirmation of payment obligation, such as fine for negligence and automobile tax, among the lawsuit in this case, is unlawful and dismissed, and the remaining claims are dismissed as there is no reason.

arrow