logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원순천지원 2019.06.12 2018가단79510
청약에대한승낙의의사표시
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 30, 2010, the Plaintiff leased, from C, real estate listed in the separate sheet of publicly constructed rental housing (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from C, as the lease deposit amount of KRW 15 million, five years (from November 30, 2010 to October 28, 2016), and the Plaintiff’s wife and children moved into the instant apartment on December 1, 201 and filed a move-in report on January 2, 201, and thereafter reside in the instant apartment.

B. On October 24, 2017, the Defendant, a rental business operator, succeeded to the status of the rental business operator by purchasing the instant apartment house from C and completing the registration of ownership transfer. On October 29, 2017, the Defendant, a rental business operator, concluded a lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff for the lease deposit of KRW 11,49 million, monthly rent of KRW 20,000,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 29,000,000 from October 29, 2017 to October 28, 2018.

C. On August 22, 2018, the Mineyang market approved conversion of D apartment including the instant apartment on sale in lots. D.

On August 2018, the Plaintiff filed a preferential application for conversion for sale in lots with the Defendant regarding the instant apartment, but the Defendant rejected the application on the ground that the instant apartment does not constitute a person eligible for conversion for sale in lots due to the lack of the Plaintiff’s move-in report

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to Gap 4, Gap 6, Gap 7, Gap 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that, even though the Plaintiff did not make a move-in report to the instant apartment, but has been actually residing, the Plaintiff constitutes a person eligible for the preferential sale conversion under Article 21(1)1 of the former Rental Housing Act (wholly amended by Act No. 13499, Aug. 28, 2015; hereinafter “former Rental Housing Act”), and thus, constitutes a person eligible for the preferential sale conversion under Article 21(1)1 of the former Rental Housing Act (wholly residing in the relevant rental housing from the date of occupancy to the date of conversion for sale in lots).

arrow