“I moved into room 201, but they gave me room 202”...Law: “Follow the sign at the entrance”

The court ruled that when the room number on the real estate documents and the room number on the door plate are different, ownership of the room must follow the standards under which the lease agreement was established.

The Seoul Western District Court announced on the 21st that it ruled to dismiss the plaintiff's claim in the building delivery lawsuit filed by the trust company against tenant A on the 18th of last month.

Mr. A, who rented an officetel in Seoul, received a notice from a trust company in February this year to hand over the room he was renting.

Previously, a real estate mortgage trust contract was signed surrounding this officetel building, and the building owner transferred ownership to a trust company in 2018 and received a loan from a financial institution.

Afterwards, the owner signed a lease contract with Mr. A for room 201, one of the 16 rooms of the officetel, in 2021.

Then, based on the deposit received from Mr. A, part of the loan was repaid and the transfer of ownership of unit 201 was completed.

However, room 202 on the same floor was still owned by a trust company, and the disposal process began when the owner failed to repay the loan.

The problem occurred when the number listed on the doorplate and the number on the building status map did not match.

Mr. A's room was numbered 201 on the door plate, but it was written as number 202 on the building status map.

On this basis, the trust company claimed that the ownership was theirs.

However, Mr. A refuted that the trust company had no ownership, saying that the place he had entered into after signing a contract with the owner was room 201, which was indicated on the front door.

It was also claimed that there was no obligation to hand over the room.

Accordingly, the court ruled in favor of Mr. A, saying, “The landlord and Mr. A recognized the contracted room as room 201 indicated on the door,” and “The tenants of other rooms also formed a legal relationship based on the doorplate.”

At the same time, the ruling said, “Even the plaintiff had in the past acquired legal rights by requesting delivery of the building to the tenant who was numbered 202 on the door plate (number 201 on the document),” and added, “Because the building officials, including the plaintiff, actually divided ownership according to the number written on the door, it cannot be said that ownership was established according to the document.”

Attorney Joo Hyeon-do of the Daeryun Law Firm, who was in charge of Mr. A's legal representation, explained, "The reason the building status map and the door plate do not match is because the door plate was attached differently from the time of construction. It is difficult to hold the tenants, including Mr. A, at fault for only signing the contract as indicated on the door. Rather, the plaintiff is responsible for correcting or correcting this."

[View full article] - “I moved into room 201, but they gave me room 202”...Law: “Follow the sign at the entrance”(Shortcut)