[ad_1]
After last year’s Supreme Court ruling ‘no ticket reselling’
Litigation planning targeting buyer settlement money
“The contract with the consent of the implementer is valid”
After the revision of the law on the sale of tickets for the elections to the National Assembly
Buyers of ‘Takji’ held a press conference in front of Suwon High Court in June. Hankyung DB
In developing a public housing site, a court ruled that if an indigenous people had illegally resold the immigrant housing site (tag), they could not claim ownership. It is a ruling in the sense that the indigenous people will not be able to return the tickets bought by the buyer, so it is expected that many trials of ‘ticket contract invalidation’ in the second new city will be stopped.
According to the Suwon District Court, on the 9th, the Civil Affairs Division of the Pyeongtaek Branch (Presiding Judge Kim Jang-gu) filed a “ property ” submitted by a native A from Godeok International New Town in Pyeongtaek , Gyeonggi Province against the project operator, LH (Korea Land and Housing Corporation) and Buyer B. A decision was made to dismiss or dismiss the lawsuit for ‘Transfer Registration Request’.
Mr. A filed a lawsuit in January asking the ultimate buyer to return ownership of the ticket. Last year, after the Supreme Court ruled that “ the contract for the succession of rights and obligations for resale tickets is invalid, ” more than 1,000 lawsuits from indigenous peoples have been filed requesting the return of their tickets or invalidating the contract in second new locations like Gwanggyo Godeok. .
The court ruled that the natives had no authority to claim ownership of the ticket. This is because the Indigenous Peoples Resale Law was the reason for the termination of the contract under the Housing Development Promotion Law. Aboriginal people can sell their land after receiving the right to sell. However, before that, most of them signed a land sale contract with LH on an illegal resale. The court found that this contract was illegal, so it could not apply for the property transfer registration. The court noted that “indigenous inhabitants cannot resell the land before the registration of the transfer of ownership, and the fact that they have filled out false documents without notifying LH of the resale are the reasons for the termination of the contract.”
Native Americans can’t get their tickets back … New City’s second ‘contract invalidation’ lawsuit remains
The ruling is also expected to affect the lawsuit to invalidate the contract for the right to sell the relocated house in Gyeonggi province, Pyeongtaek Godeok, Hanam Wirye and Suwon Gwanggyo. This is because even if an indigenous people files a lawsuit against the buyer for invalidation of the contract, the property cannot be returned.
In the second new city this year, a lawsuit has arisen for invalidating the contract for the right to sell the relocated land of origin (boleto). Even professional lawyers and brokers set out to plan litigation. The target is the buyer who bought a “ticket” from an indigenous people.
On behalf of the natives, they sued the buyer for invalidation of the contract and demanded settlement money and compensation for success. The settlement amount is known to be between 50 million and 200 million won, depending on the location of the lot. Some brokers turned over documents submitted to real estate brokerage firms to law firms and filed a lawsuit against the invalidation of the contract without the consent of the natives.
The start of the planning lawsuit was a Supreme Court ruling last year. Tickets are pre-sale rights that are granted to natives when developing housing sites such as new cities. Recipients of compensation are selected, land is removed and contracts are in order. At this time, the natives have the authority to sell a ticket once after receiving a plot of land and paying the deposit. Although it is illegal to resell tickets before making the initial payment, the judiciary has admitted such reselling.
Then last year, the Supreme Court issued a ruling denying the effect of the usual ticket resale. Subsequently, lawsuits for the invalidation of the contract arose, and the buyer handed over the settlement money to the indigenous peoples “crying and eating mustard.” This is because the property loses its validity if the person loses the demand for the invalidation of the contract according to the Supreme Law. There were even cases where a buyer who built a building and even welcomed a tenant had to demolish the building. The buyer who received the correct and obligated succession with the consent of the project operator, LH, was no exception.
With this ruling, the demands of professional brokers and attorneys are expected to decline further. If this sentence is confirmed by the Supreme Law, the title of the ticket is the property of the final buyer. According to LH, ownership of the current record rests with the ultimate purchaser.
A lawyer for the prosecution said: “If the decision of the first trial is confirmed by the Supreme Law, the natives will not be returned to their homes for the immigrants,” and said: “The indigenous peoples will not continue with a futile demand.”
The National Assembly also adopted legislation to prevent disturbances in the real estate market surrounding the ticket. Hong Ki-won, a member of the National Land Transportation Committee of the National Assembly, and member of the Democratic Party Hong Ki-won, representatively proposed the ‘Revision of the Housing Site Development Promotion Law’ last month. . The amendment included a new clause that states that if the buyer has completed the registration of the transfer of ownership with the consent of the project operator, such as LH, the contract will be considered valid.
Reporter Gil-Sung Yang [email protected]
