A significant rental fraud case has emerged involving a large-scale subleasing scheme that defrauded tenants of 10 billion won in deposits. Tenants believed they were safe because they were dealing with the Korea Construction Technology Association, a public institution, as assured by real estate agents. However, it was revealed that Sovereign State, the entity that leased the building, squandered the tenants' deposits on an electric vehicle charging station project. The court denied the association's liability for damages, leaving the tenants in a precarious situation without legal recourse. Our investigative team focused on the realities and structural risks of subleasing contracts that lack legal protection.
Choi Hwang-soo, a professor of real estate at Konkuk University, agreed with the first-instance ruling that it is difficult to recognize the association's legal responsibility, but he pointed out issues with the exemption clause included in the contract. He stated, "If the landlord approved the sublease, they should normally bear responsibility towards the final tenant as well," but the clause stating that the association is not liable for matters agreed upon between the landlord and tenant created a structure that absolved the association of responsibility. He added, "Tenants should not have signed if such exemption clauses were present in the contract."
The use of the term 'public' by Sovereign State and real estate agents also misled tenants. Eom Jeong-sook, a real estate attorney at a comprehensive law firm, noted, "The fact that the building owner is a legal entity under the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport likely served as a significant trust factor for tenants," emphasizing that it was not unreasonable for tenants to believe, 'Since it's an association's building, it must be safe.' However, she pointed out that the current legal principle, which states there is no direct contractual relationship between the original landlord and the subtenant, was reflected in this ruling, highlighting how this principle works against tenants.
Tenants claim that the association effectively facilitated Sovereign State's mismanagement. However, proving 'complicity' in a legal sense is expected to be challenging.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.