logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.10.20 2017가합52701
승낙의사표시청구
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant newly built 515 households for publicly constructed apartment C, a public rental house B on the land of Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (395 households for public rental, private housing, and foreigner-only rental housing: 120 households, hereinafter “instant apartment”) and recruited occupants.

B. On September 23, 2009, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit of KRW 69,850,000, monthly rent of KRW 476,00, and the lease term of KRW 476,00 from April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2012, and the above lease agreement has been renewed every two years until the expiration of the lease term of the instant apartment of this case.

C. Around November 2015, the Defendant decided to convert the apartment of this case into early sale, and publicly announced that the lessee who had resided in the relevant house from the date of occupancy to the date of sale in lots pursuant to Article 21(1) of the former Rental Housing Act (amended by Act No. 13499, Aug. 28, 2015; hereinafter “former Rental Housing Act”) shall be eligible, subject to eligibility, address relocation, housing owner, and the person who violated the Rental Housing Act.

On November 3, 2015, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff “a guidance for exclusion from conversion of public rental housing units for sale in C 10 years” to the effect that the Plaintiff is excluded from those eligible for conversion of address change.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff is a non-resident who has continuously resided in the instant real estate, which is the Plaintiff’s publicly constructed rental house, and has the right to purchase the rental house preferentially, and the Defendant refused to make an offer by the Plaintiff without justifiable grounds. Therefore, the Defendant’s consent to the Plaintiff’s offer is accepted

arrow