CONTENTS
- 1. The Client Who Received a Gumi Attorney Recommendation
- - The Circumstances of the Client's Case as Understood by the Gumi Attorney
- - The Building Delivery Lawsuit Explained by a Gumi Attorney
- 2. Assistance for the Client Who Received a Gumi Attorney Recommendation
- - Gumi Attorney Argued That the Lessee Had Opposing Power
- - Gumi Attorney Argued That the Leasehold Was Not Extinguished
- 3. The Client Who Received a Gumi Attorney Recommendation Recovered the Full Deposit
1. The Client Who Received a Gumi Attorney Recommendation
This is the story of a client who came to Daeryun on a referral to a Gumi attorney.
The client was in a very bewildering situation, having been sued for delivery of a building by the landlord while the deposit had not been returned.
Determined to recover at least the deposit, the client received a referral to an attorney who had experience with many deposit-related cases in downtown Gumi and came to the Daeryun Law Firm Gumi attorney branch office.
The Daeryun Gumi attorney closely examined the facts from the consultation stage and devised a strategy for the response to the building delivery lawsuit by the plaintiff (the landlord), together with the return of the deposit.
The Circumstances of the Client's Case as Understood by the Gumi Attorney
The client moved into an apartment in the city of Gumi as a tenant, drew up a lease agreement, and completed the move-in report and the fixed date.
While living without any problems during the contract period, the owner of the building changed, and the client continued to reside under the existing contract terms without a separate renewal of the contract.
However, before long, as the new landlord's financial condition deteriorated, the housing was put up for auction, and the client received only a portion of the deposit through distribution.
The client contacted the plaintiff, who had acquired ownership through the auction, in order to recover the remaining deposit, but the plaintiff gave various reasons and delayed payment.
The plaintiff eventually even sent a certified mail containing unreasonable claims and filed a lawsuit for delivery of the building against the client.
Feeling wronged, the client came to Daeryun 🔗Gumi attorney to request help, and we immediately took action.
The Building Delivery Lawsuit Explained by a Gumi Attorney
A building delivery lawsuit is a lawsuit in which the owner of real property demands that the person currently occupying that property vacate the building.
The representative situations in which a building delivery lawsuit may be brought are as follows.
| -When the lease has ended but the tenant continues to live there -When a person who has newly acquired ownership through an auction demands that the existing tenant vacate -When there is an unauthorized occupant (e.g., illegal occupancy) |
The reason the client who came to the Gumi attorney was served with a building delivery lawsuit is that the plaintiff, the new owner who had won the home at auction, brought a lawsuit against the existing tenant, the client, demanding that the home be vacated because the owner had changed.
2. Assistance for the Client Who Received a Gumi Attorney Recommendation
We proceeded to assist the client who received a Gumi attorney referral.
Based on the relevant legal principles, the Gumi attorney devised a strategy to protect the client's interests and with the goal of the return of the deposit that had not been received.
Gumi Attorney Argued That the Lessee Had Opposing Power
The client concluded a lease contract concerning the real estate in this case with the former landlord, and on the same day filed a move-in report and received a fixed date.
The Gumi attorney emphasized that the client was, under the Housing Lease Protection Act, a lessee with opposing power.
-Even where there is no registration of the lease, a lease takes effect against third parties from the day following the date on which the lessee completes delivery of the housing and resident registration. In this case, the resident registration is deemed to have been made at the time the move-in report is filed.
-The transferee of a leased house is deemed to have succeeded to the status of the lessor.
Gumi Attorney Argued That the Leasehold Was Not Extinguished
The Housing Lease Protection Act provides that, while a lease right is in principle extinguished through the auction procedure, a lease right with opposing power whose deposit has not been fully repaid is, exceptionally, not extinguished.
A lease right shall be extinguished upon the successful bid for the leased house where an auction under the Civil Execution Act has been conducted with respect to the leased house. Provided, that this shall not apply to a lease right with opposing power whose deposit has not been fully repaid.
The client received a distribution of only an amount far below the deposit.
The Gumi attorney emphasized that the client's lease right is not extinguished until the remaining lease deposit is returned.
3. The Client Who Received a Gumi Attorney Recommendation Recovered the Full Deposit
The client, who received a Gumi attorney recommendation, succeeded in recovering the full amount of the remaining deposit.
The court ordered that the client deliver the building to the plaintiff and that the plaintiff pay the full amount of the remaining deposit.
The client said, "I was really worried that I would be evicted without even receiving the remaining deposit. I think I was able to receive the deposit safely because the Gumi attorney, who had experience with many related cases, explained my position well in legal terms."
A lease dispute such as the case above is not simply a matter of the landlord not returning the deposit.
Because legal issues such as a move-in report, a fixed date, auction, the right of preferential reimbursement, opposing power, priority of distribution, and grounds for refusing delivery are complexly intertwined, you should obtain the help of an attorney who accurately understands the Housing Lease Protection Act and the related legal principles and has practical experience.
It is best to choose not simply an attorney who only handles litigation representation, but a specialized attorney who has experience with cases in the relevant field.
At Daeryun Law Firm, attorneys with broad experience in real estate litigation work as one team to realize clients' interests and protect their rights.
This content is based on actual case studies of Daeryun Law LLC with some adaptations, and the copyright belongs to our firm.
Unauthorized reproduction, duplication, or distribution and other copyright infringements may result in legal action under applicable laws.
