logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.11.11 2016나2442
자동차소유권이전등록
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff alleged that he had lent the name of the business operator to the defendant who intends to operate the marina around November 2004. At the defendant's request, the plaintiff purchased each of the motor vehicles listed in the separate sheet 1 and 2 (hereinafter "each of the motor vehicles of this case") in the name of the plaintiff, and the defendant set up a lock with each of the motor vehicles of this case around January 2005.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to take over the registration procedure for the transfer of automobile ownership from the plaintiff.

In addition, as the Defendant is the actual owner of each of the instant automobiles, it is sought to confirm that the Defendant is liable to pay various taxes imposed on the instant automobiles from January 11, 2005 to the Defendant.

2. According to the evidence No. 2 and evidence No. 3-1 and No. 2 of the judgment, it is recognized that the Plaintiff registered the business with the trade name of Empt on November 10, 2004, the Plaintiff purchased each motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet No. 1 around January 11, 2005, and each motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet No. 2 around March 9, 2005.

However, it is not sufficient that the Defendant is the actual owner of each of the instant vehicles only with the statement of No. 1, and there is no evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

The plaintiff's assertion cannot be accepted.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, the defendant's appeal is accepted, and the plaintiff's claim is revoked, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow