(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.12.10 2015가단20052

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) 수원지방법원 2015.12.10 2015가단20052

자동차소유권이전등록절차이행 등

Text

1. Claim for confirmation of liability for payment, such as taxes, public charges, and administrative fines, for each motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet among the instant lawsuits.

Reasons

1. It is acknowledged that ex officio determination on the legitimacy of the lawsuit for confirmation of liability for payment such as taxes, public charges, and fines for negligence is based on the following: (a) the benefit of confirmation in the lawsuit for confirmation is disputed between the parties regarding the legal relationship subject to the lawsuit; and (b) the judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means when the plaintiff’s legal status is at risk of unstable.

Attached Form

Even if a judgment is rendered to the effect that the obligation to pay taxes, public charges, and fines imposed in the name of the plaintiff after 2003 in the register of vehicles stated in the list is against the defendants, the obligation to pay such taxes, public charges, and fines is not transferred from the plaintiff to the defendants, and it does not naturally affect the state or local government which is not a party to the above judgment, so the above judgment of confirmation cannot be the most effective

Therefore, the part of the claim for confirmation of liability for payment, such as taxes, public charges, and fines imposed after 2003 in the register of automobile for each of the automobiles listed in the separate sheet, is unlawful.

2. The Plaintiff asserted that Defendant B acquired a motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet No. 1 from the Plaintiff or the third party who acquired the previous motor vehicle from the Plaintiff on or around 2003, and sought from the Plaintiff to take over the registration procedure for the ownership transfer of the motor vehicle based on the transfer agreement around 2003. However, it is insufficient to recognize that Defendant B acquired the said motor vehicle from the Plaintiff or the third party who acquired the previous motor vehicle from the Plaintiff on or around 2003, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B cannot be accepted.

3. Determination as to the claim for the acquisition of the registration procedure for ownership transfer against Defendant C.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2016.03.10 2015가단29456

-울산지방법원 2016.03.31 2015나4672

-서울남부지방법원 2015.11.10 2015가단30293

-서울서부지방법원 2015.06.05 2014가단45181

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.05.30 2016가단24146