The case holding that the Korea National Housing Corporation's claim for the explanation of rental housing against the lessee of rental housing in violation of the Rental Housing Construction Promotion Act cannot be regarded as abuse of rights.

At present, there are a lot of unauthorized transfer of rental apartments, and the Korea National Housing Corporation has already received the sale price in full, even if the lawsuit of this case was filed against the Defendants only, it cannot be deemed as an abuse of the right to file the lawsuit of this case against the Defendants who have acquired the right to lease of rental housing in violation of the prohibition of transfer of rental housing under the Rental Housing Construction Promotion Act, which is a mandatory law.

Article 2 of the Civil Act, Article 11 of the Rental Housing Construction Promotion Act

Korea National Housing Corporation

Mangman and four others

Seoul High Court Decision 90Na35941 delivered on December 18, 1990

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendants.

1. Determination on the Defendants’ ground of appeal No. 1

The judgment of the court below as to the point out of the theory of lawsuit is justified in light of the relation of evidence as stated by the court below, and it cannot be viewed that there is an error like the theory of lawsuit. The argument is nothing more than criticism of the judgment of the court below as to the determination of the evidence belonging to the exclusive jurisdiction and the recognition of facts, and it cannot be accepted.

2. Determination on the ground of appeal No. 2

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court below, even if the court of first instance filed the lawsuit of this case against the defendants who acquired the right to lease of rental housing in violation of the prohibition on the transfer of rental housing under the Rental Housing Construction Promotion Act, which is a mandatory law, even though the plaintiff had already received the sale price in full, the court of first instance held that the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case against the defendants who acquired the right to lease of rental housing by violating the prohibition on the transfer of rental housing under the Rental Housing Construction Promotion Act, which is a mandatory law, is not an abuse of right. In light of the provisions of related Acts and subordinate statutes, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and the judgment of the court below is not erroneous, and it is not acceptable to accept the argument of this case.

3. Therefore, the appeal by the Defendants is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants who have lost them. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Yoon Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)