logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.30 2016가단148027
자동차소유권이전등록절차이행청구
Text

1. The defendant is based on the sale and purchase of the motor vehicles listed in the separate sheet from the plaintiff on February 2006.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. around February 2006, the Plaintiff: (a) placed a motor vehicle listed in the [Attachment List owned by C” (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”); and (b) borrowed KRW 4 million from the Plaintiff.

B. Around that time, the Defendant decided to purchase the instant vehicle from the Plaintiff through the pawnpo, and delivered the instant vehicle, but the Plaintiff did not appear at the promise place for the preparation of the transfer of ownership registration documents, etc. to return the goods left on the ridge of the instant vehicle.

C. Since February 206 to October 2017, the Defendant, without registering the transfer of ownership on the instant motor vehicle, directly operated the instant motor vehicle, or transferred the instant motor vehicle to a third party to operate the motor vehicle. In that process, from February 2006 to October 2017, the Defendant unpaid KRW 7,341,450 in total, including KRW 3,310,650 in automobile tax, KRW 2,431,650 in fines for negligence not covered by mandatory insurance, KRW 815,60 in fines for negligence in violation of speeding, and KRW 7,341,40 in fines for negligence in violation of speeding duty, and notified each competent authority that the Plaintiff

[Judgment of the court below] The facts that there was no dispute over the ground for recognition, Gap evidence 2 through 13 (including the number of branch offices), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. First of all, in a case where the transferee of a motor vehicle delivers the motor vehicle from the transferor but does not transfer the registered name, the transferor may seek against the transferee the procedure for acquiring the ownership transfer registration (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da11920, Apr. 24, 2008). Thus, the Defendant is obligated to take over the ownership transfer registration procedure for the motor vehicle of this case from the Plaintiff on the ground of sale in February 2006.

Furthermore, if a transferee of a motor vehicle uses the motor vehicle in delivery and fails to take over the transfer registration procedure, thereby imposing taxes and public charges on the transferor, he/she shall be held liable for damages due to nonperformance (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da1548

arrow