All
| TITLE | Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2023Gadan124967 Decided May 21, 2024: Final and Conclusive 【Return of Security Deposit】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 This case concerns B who has rented and lived in A’s apartment after entering into a lease contract with A and subsequently requested a mutual termination of the contract due to inter-floor noise issues. When A refused to agree to a mutual termination of the lease contract, B expressed an intent to terminate the contract and sought the return of the security deposit from A, claiming that, while the level of noise exceeding the standards set forth in the Rules on the Scope and Standards of Inter-Floor Noise in Multi-Family Housing has continuously occurred since moving, causing B emotional distress, A, the lessor, took no action, thereby allegedly neglecting the lessor’s duty to maintain the leased property in a condition necessary for use or profit-making during the term of the contract as well as the duty of repair. Assessment of disturbances related to external factors, such as inter-floor noise, must be based on the standards set by relevant statutes to determine whether they hinder the use or profit-making of the leased property or cause situations that require the leased property to be repaired. That said, the standards established in the former Regulations on Housing Construction Standards, Etc. do not impose obligations on owners of multi-family housing, and the standards set forth in the Rules on the Scope and Standards of Inter-Floor Noise in Multi-Family Housing cannot be viewed as material standards that must be observed by multi-family housing. Therefore, A, as the lessor, cannot be considered to have neglected the duty to ensure the use or profit-making of the leased property or the duty of repair, and thus B’s claim is dismissed. | |
