The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to Articles 19-2 and 31-2 of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act, a person who is supplied with a housing site developed under the Housing Site Development Promotion Act may not resell the housing site as it is without using it for the purpose of its supply until the registration of ownership transfer is conducted: Provided, That in cases prescribed by Presidential Decree, such restrictions need not apply, and in cases of resale of the housing site in violation of such restrictions, the relevant juristic act

Meanwhile, according to Article 13-3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26485, Aug. 11, 2015) (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of this case”), “cases prescribed by Presidential Decree” in the proviso to Article 19-2 (1) of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act refers to cases where the consent of the implementer is obtained as it falls under any of subparagraphs 1 through 9: Provided, That in cases falling under subparagraphs 1, 2, 5, and 7, only applicable to a person who is supplied with a housing site for the first time from the implementer; subparagraphs 1 through 9 are supplied with a housing construction site in accordance with the implementation of relocation measures under the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works (hereinafter “Public Works Act”); school site site site and medical facility site; etc.; where a person who is supplied with a housing site or purchaser is the State, local government, public institution or local government-invested public corporation (paragraphs 3 and 4); and where the purchaser is supplied with the housing site development project operator or is transferred to the purchaser under a free contract.