(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2017.08.25 2017가단6153

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) 수원지방법원안산지원 2017.08.25 2017가단6153

자동차소유권이전등록절차 인수 등

Text

1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for the confirmation of tax and public charges shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant shall attach a separate sheet from the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 3, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a consignment management contract (hereinafter “instant consignment management contract”) with the Defendant with respect to a motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”), and completed the transfer of ownership on the same day.

B. In concluding the instant consignment management contract, the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff KRW 132,00 per month the above consignment management expenses to the Plaintiff, pay the tax and public charges on the instant automobile to the Plaintiff. The Defendant agreed to pay the penalty, penalty, penalty, and fine for negligence due to the vehicle operation within the designated date, and agreed to have the Plaintiff terminate the instant consignment management contract if the monthly payment is delayed for more than three months.

C. The Defendant does not pay KRW 8,578,00, automobile tax of KRW 13,170, and environment tax of KRW 528,710, administrative fine of KRW 1,661,40, and association expenses of KRW 142,00.

On May 11, 2017, a duplicate of the complaint of this case, stating that the Plaintiff terminated the entrusted management contract of this case on the grounds of the Defendant’s nonperformance of obligation to pay the entrusted management expenses.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s determination on the legitimacy of the part of the claim for confirmation of payment of taxes and public charges among the instant lawsuits sought confirmation from the Defendant that the administrative agency imposed on the Plaintiff on the instant automobile, but, inasmuch as res judicata of the judgment does not extend to the administrative agency that is not a party to the instant case, the Plaintiff’s duty to pay taxes and public charges is extinguished or transferred to the Defendant in relation to the administrative agency, and thus, the said confirmation claim is the most effective and appropriate means to remove the Plaintiff’s legal status unstable and

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2016.03.31 2015나4672

-대전지방법원 2016.03.10 2015가단29456

-수원지방법원 2015.12.10 2015가단20052

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.05.30 2016가단24146

-부산지방법원 2017.04.26 2015가단82487