1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff asserted as the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim that he/she was homeless and concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant on the real estate listed in the separate sheet of publicly constructed rental house (hereinafter “the instant apartment”) and thereafter, the Plaintiff continued to reside until now after renewal of the said lease agreement and continued to meet the requirements for the conversion of the sale of rental housing, but the Defendant refused to sell the instant apartment to the Plaintiff without justifiable grounds, and sought confirmation against the Defendant as a qualified person for the conversion of the sale of rental housing on the instant apartment.

2. Determination

A. Article 21 (1) 4 of the Rental Housing Act provides that "a lessee who is a homeless person at the time of sale conversion" means a lessee in a case where the lessee himself/herself resides in the rental house at the time of sale conversion from the beginning date of the lease contract to the date of sale conversion, or a part of the household members who had lived with the initial lessee continues to reside for the said period even if he/she had the relevant rental house and had the said

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do14871, Feb. 26, 2015). B.

Judgment

According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and Nos. 1 through 4, the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) with the Defendant on September 24, 2009 with respect to the instant apartment, which is a publicly constructed rental house, with each of the following terms (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) between April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2012: