(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2015.09.22 2015가단8956

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 2015.09.22 2015가단8956

소유권이전등록

Text

1. The defendant is based on the sale on June 4, 2004 as to the motor vehicles listed in the separate sheet from the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

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.

참조조문

-자동차관리법 제12조

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2017.10.10 2016가단30250

-광주지방법원 2015.03.27 2014가단26700

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2017.02.02 2015가단19241

-부산지방법원동부지원 2014.05.14 2013가단16055

-대구지방법원 2016.02.23 2015가단37808