Was the building sold to an acquaintance a lease scam? Former building owner in his 40s not indicted

A man in his 40s who was accused of conspiring with an acquaintance to commit a lease fraud against tenants was not indicted.

According to the legal community on the 20th, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office announced that it had decided not to indict Mr. A, a man in his 40s who was sent on fraud charges on the 22nd of last month.

Mr. A, who had purchased and operated a building since 2016, sold it to his acquaintance, Mr. B, in 2023.

At that time, Mr. A put a condition on Mr. B to assume the return debt for the lease deposit of about 2.1 billion won, and Mr. B also accepted this, and the transaction was completed.

However, 7 months after purchasing the building, Mr. B applied for personal rehabilitation, and the investigation began as he was unable to pay the rent deposit to the tenants.

The tenants claimed that Mr. A defrauded them of the deposit by making them sign a contract by reducing the senior deposit at the time of the lease contract and that he sold the building to Mr. B at a low price by making it a 'can lease'.

Mr. A denied the charges, saying that although it is true that a mistake was made in the process of notifying the senior deposit, this was also negligent in not clarifying the relevant amount in the real estate brokerage, and that there was no intent to defraud.

Regarding the charge of jeonse fraud, he also claimed, "Mr. B personally showed me his salary slip at the time and the bank loan was obtained normally, so I could not doubt his financial ability," and "If Mr. B's financial condition had not been good, he would not have sold the building."

The prosecution found that Mr. A was not guilty.

“There was negligence in notifying the senior deposit to be reduced, but considering that Mr. A had sufficient cash assets to prepare for the return of the deposit at the time he owned the property and his income level was high, it is difficult to conclude that it was intentional defrauding.”

Attorney Park Seong-yoon of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, explained, "In a general lease relationship, it cannot be said that there is an obligation to notify the existence of a senior lien right. In this case, Mr. B achieved rehabilitation by unreasonably purchasing additional buildings other than Mr. A's building, and Mr. A actively explained to the tenants that there was no intention to deceive them at the time of signing the contract, leading to a good result."

Jeong Eui-jin (jej88@ikbc.co.kr)

[View full article]
Is the building sold to an acquaintance a lease scam?...Former building owner in his 40s not indicted (link)