logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.09.08 2015가단50961
자동차소유권이전등록절차인수
Text

1. The portion of the lawsuit in this case, such as taxes, public charges, and penalty, shall be dismissed;

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.

Reasons

1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part demanding acquisition, such as taxes, public charges, and penalty, ex officio, and the part demanding acquisition among the instant lawsuit, such as taxes, public charges, and penalty.

The Plaintiff requested the Defendant to pay taxes, public charges, and penalties, etc. imposed after May 25, 2010 on the motor vehicles listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”).

However, if the above claim is a performance suit seeking monetary payment against the defendant, the amount would not be specified, and if it is a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the defendant's obligation to pay the above taxes, public charges, and penalty, etc., it is difficult to view that there exists a benefit of confirmation.

(3) The judgment of this case is effective only between the plaintiff and the defendant, and it does not extend to the State or local governments. Thus, even if the plaintiff received the aforementioned confirmation judgment, in relation to the administrative agency imposing taxes, public charges, penalty, etc., the person liable for payment is not changed to the defendant). Therefore,

2. Although the Plaintiff acquired the instant motor vehicle on May 25, 2010, the Plaintiff failed to comply with the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer, and sought the acquisition of the said procedure.

According to the evidence Gap evidence No. 2, the defendant paid the automobile tax in arrears on May 30, 201 and December 19, 2013, and received the return of the automobile number plate kept in custody. However, it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant acquired the instant automobile on May 25, 2010, which is alleged by the defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

(The presiding judge ordered the Plaintiff to arrange the purport of the instant claim and the cause of the claim, but the Plaintiff did not make any changes thereto). Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim on this part is without merit.

3. If so, among the instant lawsuits, a claim for acquisition, such as taxes, public charges, and penalties, is filed.

arrow