Seoul court orders man to return grandmother’s public rental home over lease fraud
In short
A Seoul court dismissed a lawsuit by a man who sought to keep his late grandmother’s public rental home after the housing authority found he owned another home and was in the United States during the period he said he lived with and cared for her. The court ruled that receiving a rental home by fraudulent means was grounds to terminate the contract and ordered him to hand the unit over to the Seoul Housing and Urban Development Corporation (SH).
Read the full story 2 min read
A Seoul court has dismissed a lawsuit by a man who sought to keep his late grandmother’s public rental home after the housing authority found he owned another home and was staying in the United States during the period he said he lived with and nursed her. The Seoul Central District Court’s civil division 42, presided over by Judge Choi Nu-rim, ruled against the man, identified only as A, in his suit against the Seoul Housing and Urban Development Corporation (SH) seeking to nullify the lease termination, Yonhap and Seoul Economic Daily reported. The court ordered him to hand the unit over to SH. [ 1 , 2 ]
According to the two reports, A registered as a resident at his grandmother’s SH rental home in March 2021 and submitted a pledge that he owned no home. The following year, SH notified his grandmother that a household member had been confirmed as a homeowner and moved to terminate the contract; the notice was cancelled after A explained that he was staying overseas and was not a household member. His grandmother died in November 2023, leaving a will that bequeathed the entire leasehold to A. A then applied to have the lease put in his name, saying he had registered at the address and lived with her from January 2023 to nurse her, and SH approved the change. SH later confirmed that A had owned a multi-family house during the period he claimed to have lived with his grandmother and terminated the contract. [ 1 , 2 ]
The court said A’s account did not match the facts. It found that he stayed in the United States and returned on Dec. 21, 2023, leaving again for the United States three days later. It also held that even if his claim of living with his grandmother were true, he was a homeowner at the time and therefore did not meet the residency requirement. The court said the case constituted receiving a rental home by fraudulent means and was a ground for terminating the contract, and it dismissed his claim. A had argued that he had already sold the house to his mother when the name change was approved and that SH had improperly accessed his personal data without his consent; the court rejected those arguments, according to the reports. [ 1 , 2 ]
Seoul Economic Daily added that SH checks whether tenants own homes once a year and their actual residence twice a year, citing an October 2025 Seoul city explanatory document, and that the city has asked the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport to shorten the eligibility check cycle. It also cited 2020 parliamentary audit data showing 1,896 ineligible public rental tenancies detected in Seoul over five years, of which 1,108 involved home ownership. [ 2 ]
Why it matters
The ruling backs SH’s practice of re-checking tenants’ eligibility after a lease is approved, which the documents say includes annual checks of home ownership and twice-yearly checks of actual residence. Seoul Economic Daily reported that Seoul has asked the land ministry to shorten the eligibility check cycle, and that 2020 parliamentary audit data showed 1,896 ineligible public rental tenancies detected over five years, 1,108 of them involving home ownership.
Key facts
- Seoul Central District Court civil division 42, presided over by Judge Choi Nu-rim, ruled against a man identified as A in his suit seeking to nullify SH’s termination of the lease. [ 1 , 2 ]
- A registered as a resident at his grandmother’s SH rental home in March 2021 and submitted a pledge that he owned no home. [ 1 , 2 ]
- In 2022 SH notified the grandmother of termination after finding a household member owned a home, then cancelled the notice after A explained he was staying overseas. [ 1 , 2 ]
- The grandmother died in November 2023 and left the entire leasehold to A by will; A applied for a change of tenant name, saying he had lived with her since January 2023 to nurse her, and SH approved it. [ 1 , 2 ]
- SH later found that A had owned a multi-family house during the period he claimed to have lived with his grandmother, and terminated the contract. [ 1 , 2 ]
- The court said A was in the United States and returned on Dec. 21, 2023, leaving again three days later, and that even if his cohabitation claim were true he was a homeowner and did not meet the residency requirement. [ 1 , 2 ]
- The court ordered A to hand the rental home over to SH. [ 1 , 2 ]
- Seoul Economic Daily reported that SH checks home ownership once a year and residence twice a year, citing a Seoul city explanatory document from October 2025. [ 2 ]
Confirmed by several sources
- The Seoul Central District Court dismissed A’s suit against SH and ordered him to hand over the rental home. [ 1 , 2 ]
- A registered at his grandmother’s rental home in March 2021 and submitted a no-home pledge. [ 1 , 2 ]
- SH terminated the lease after finding A owned a multi-family house during the period he said he lived with his grandmother. [ 1 , 2 ]
- The court cited A’s US stay, including his Dec. 21, 2023 return and departure three days later, in rejecting his cohabitation claim. [ 1 , 2 ]
- The court said receiving a rental home by fraudulent means is a ground for terminating the contract. [ 1 , 2 ]
Still unclear
- The date the judgment was delivered Both reports say only that the case was known as of Oct. 5; neither states when the court issued the ruling.
- The basis on which the court rejected A’s claim that SH improperly accessed his personal data without consent Both outlets report the claim and that it was not accepted, but neither sets out the court’s reasoning on the privacy point.
- Whether A will appeal or by when he must vacate the unit Neither document mentions an appeal or a deadline for handing over the home.