Defense Case for Punishment of False Residence Registration | Violation of the Housing Act on a False Residence Registration Charge, Defense against Punishment through Non-Referral

The client was selected in a subscription for an apartment located in Gyeonggi-do, but afterward, unexpectedly, received a "notice of ineligibility" and faced a situation in which the selection was canceled.

The client was then investigated by the police on a charge of "violation of the Housing Act (false residence registration)," and became involved in criminal proceedings as a suspect.

The case originated from the fact that the client's address at the time of the subscription did not match the actual place of residence at the time of the incident.

The client was pregnant, and she had no choice but to stay temporarily in another region where her husband resided, for childbirth preparation and health management.

Nevertheless, she continued to maintain the house located in Gyeonggi-do, her existing residence, and was paying the utility charges and management fees normally.

However, as she came under suspicion of not having met the residence requirement for the subscription, the charge of "false residence registration for the purpose of a fraudulent subscription" was raised.

In response, the criminal law specialist attorney actively prepared in the following ways in order to prove the client's innocence.

Through this, the attorney systematically prepared the defense argument with a focus on proving that this was not an intentional false residence registration for the purpose of a fraudulent subscription.

The criminal law specialist attorney emphasized that the client had maintained an actual basis of daily life in Gyeonggi-do over a long period.

The attorney submitted as supporting materials that the client had resided in Gyeonggi-do since childhood, had graduated from elementary, middle, and high school all in that region, and that her family and social network were also all formed in Gyeonggi-do.

This regional continuity and basis of daily life served as grounds clearly showing that the client was not merely a person who had transferred her address as a formality, but a person who had actually lived as a resident of Gyeonggi-do.

Noting that at the time of the subscription the client had been selected for the housing under the qualification of "an employee of a small or medium-sized enterprise in OO City," the attorney established that the subscription was a normal application connected to her workplace.

The criminal law specialist attorney proved, with documents such as a certificate of employment, that the client had a history of working at a business within the region, and logically presented that the subscription location was also situated near her workplace, a choice made in consideration of commuting convenience.

As a result, the consistent pattern of "a daily life centered on the place of work" was recognized, and it became clearly apparent that there was no intent of a fraudulent subscription.

The criminal law specialist attorney specifically established, through objective materials, that the reason the client temporarily resided in another region was a "health need arising from marriage and pregnancy."

By submitting medical records, a pregnancy diagnosis certificate, and records of childbirth preparation, and by presenting together the husband's place of work and the timing of the circumstances, the attorney made clear that the client's stay in another region was a "temporary residence" and not for the purpose of a fraudulent subscription.

In addition, on the ground that the client had personally visited and managed the house in question at least once a month and had paid the management fees even while staying in another region, the attorney emphasized that the actual center of her residence was still in Gyeonggi-do.

Citing Supreme Court precedent, our criminal law attorney pointed out that, for ‘false or other improper means’ under the Housing Act to be established, a person without qualification must have falsely pretended to hold such qualification, or must have received a housing supply with a clear intent to act improperly.

Summary of Supreme Court Decision 93Do2579, Decided January 14, 1994

On this basis, we logically demonstrated that the client had simply proceeded through a normal subscription procedure within an existing area of living, and that no element of ‘falsehood’ or ‘improper means’ was present at all.

False resident registration does not stop at being a mere administrative false report of address. If there was a purpose of obtaining subscription eligibility, it may be punishable as a violation of related laws, including the “Housing Act.”

This is because such conduct is regarded as undermining the fairness of the housing supply system.

Level of Punishment

If the conduct is actually connected to a subscription or sale, the following additional disadvantages are imposed.

Therefore, if there is room for ‘intent’ to be suspected, it is advisable to secure the relevant evidence and respond with the assistance of an attorney.

If you are suspected of a violation of the Housing Act, not only a police investigation but also substantive disadvantages, such as cancellation of a subscription win and restriction on re-winning, may arise at the same time.

Therefore, a misstatement at the early investigation stage may later be used as unfavorable evidence in an appeal procedure or administrative litigation.

Daeryun LLC has many criminal law attorneys with specialized knowledge regarding the Housing Act and experience in handling such cases.

We systematically analyze objective materials, such as documents from the subscription process, records of daily life, and utility bill histories, and establish a defense strategy aimed at removing any basis on which the investigative authority could find ‘improper means.’

If you have currently received a notice of investigation from the police, please request assistance through a 🔗Legal Consultation Reservation.