Open Decision Ledger · Civil obligations & remedies
Loss compensation date and market value for a disqualified acquirer
Supreme Court, Aug. 14, 2025, 2022Da228230 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 소유권이전등기
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where the implementer of a housing reconstruction project must pay loss compensation to a person who cannot become a member under Article 39(2) and (3) of the Urban and Resident Environment Maintenance Act, when does the obligation to compensate arise, and what market value is the compensation calculated on?
Holding
The obligation arises on the day the person acquired the building or land, the value is assessed as at that same day, and the date on which the sales contract is deemed concluded by the exercise of the right to demand sale is also that day. The price, as loss compensation, must be the market value at that time, meaning the objective transaction price evaluated on the premise that the reconstruction project will be carried out, that is a price including the development profit expected to arise from the reconstruction.
Points at issue, verbatim
주택재건축사업의 시행자가 도시 및 주거환경정비법 제39조 제2항, 제3항에 따라 조합원의 자격을 취득할 수 없는 사람에게 손실보상을 하는 경우 손실보상의무가 발생하는 시기 및 가액을 평가하는 기준 시점 / 이 경우 손실보상액이 되는 ‘시가’의 의미
Unofficial English translation
The time at which the obligation to compensate for losses arises and the point in time serving as the standard for assessing the value, where the implementer of a housing redevelopment project compensates a person who cannot acquire qualification as a member pursuant to Article 39 paragraphs (2) and (3) of the Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments / The meaning of 'market value' as the amount of loss compensation in this case
Disposition
Partly reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결의 피고 패소 부분 중 매매를 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기청구와 인도청구 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다. 원고의 상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The portion of the judgment of the court below adverse to the defendant, insofar as it concerns the claim for registration of a transfer of ownership based on the sale and the claim for delivery, is reversed and remanded to the Seoul High Court. The plaintiff's final appeal is dismissed.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
이 경우 손실보상액으로서의 매매대금은 매매계약 성립이 의제될 당시의 해당 부동산의 시가에 의하여야 하고
Unofficial English translation
In this case, the sale price as the loss compensation must be based on the market value of the real property at the time when the formation of the sale contract is deemed to have occurred, and
Factors
- 주택재건축사업의 시행자가 도시 및 주거환경정비법 제39조 제2항, 제3항에 따라 조합원의 자격을 취득할 수 없는 사람에게 손실보상을 하는 경우 손실보상의무가 발생하는 시기 및 가액을 평가하는 기준 시점
- 이 경우 손실보상액이 되는 ‘시가’의 의미
Unofficial English translation
• The time at which the obligation to compensate for losses arises and the point in time serving as the standard for assessing the value, where the implementer of a housing redevelopment project compensates a person who cannot acquire qualification as a member pursuant to Article 39 paragraphs (2) and (3) of the Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments
• The meaning of 'market value' as the amount of loss compensation in this case
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2014. 12. 11. 선고 2014다41698 판결(공2015상, 117)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2014Da41698 decided December 11, 2014 (Gong 2015 Sang, 117)
Decisions referred to
대법원 2014. 12. 11. 선고 2014다41698 판결(공2015상, 117)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
Where the reconstruction project was not yet settled at the date of acquisition, how is the expected development profit to be quantified in the market value?
The judgment of the Seoul High Court on remand, once it fixes the price of the half share as at around 26 June 2020 with the expected development profit included, will show how that profit is measured in practice. An amendment to Article 39 of the former Urban and Resident Environment Maintenance Act, or a later decision on how expected development profit is valued, would require reading this entry again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
8 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-24
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on all 8 axes.
Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Seoul High Court, in its judgment of 17 March 2022 (2021Na2019406), held that the date the acquirer obtained the building or land after the establishment of the association and thereby lost the qualification to become a member is both the date on which the payment obligation of loss compensation arises and the reference date for the price of the sales contract deemed concluded by the exercise of the right to demand sale. It nevertheless adopted the appraiser's valuation, which was built on transaction examples from before 3 August 2017, the date of the speculative-overheating designation, with development profit arising after that date excluded, and set the price as half of the value of the property without a move-in right.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that the reference date must be around the day the defendant acquired the half share from the former spouse of the first third party, here 26 June 2020, and that the price must be a price including the development profit expected to arise from reconstruction. Because the appraisal adopted below did not properly reflect that expected development profit, it misapprehended the law on fixing the price payable under the exercise of the right to demand sale in Article 39(3) of the former Urban and Resident Environment Maintenance Act. The Court reversed the parts of the judgment unfavourable to the defendant concerning the claim for transfer of ownership by sale and the claim for delivery, remanded those parts to the Seoul High Court, and dismissed the plaintiff's appeal.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case in which the transferor falls within Article 39(2) proviso item (iv), such as a one-household one-house owner owning and residing for the periods set by the Enforcement Decree, so that the acquirer may become a member and no loss compensation arises.
- An acquisition made before the area was designated a speculative-overheating district under Article 63(1) of the Housing Act, since the bar on membership in Article 39(2) applies only to that designated area.
- A transfer by inheritance or divorce, which Article 39(2) excludes from the meaning of acquisition, so the timing rule stated for an acquisition does not fix its date.
Record verification notes
Establish the date the area was designated a speculative-overheating district and the date each half share was acquired, since the Court fixed the reference date as around the acquisition from the divorced owner on 26 June 2020. Then test the transferor against the proviso conditions of ownership and residence under Article 37(1) of the Enforcement Decree, and obtain a valuation priced as at the acquisition date with the expected development profit included.
From the official text
Points at issue
주택재건축사업의 시행자가 도시 및 주거환경정비법 제39조 제2항, 제3항에 따라 조합원의 자격을 취득할 수 없는 사람에게 손실보상을 하는 경우 손실보상의무가 발생하는 시기 및 가액을 평가하는 기준 시점 / 이 경우 손실보상액이 되는 ‘시가’의 의미
Unofficial English translation
The time at which the obligation to compensate for losses arises and the point in time serving as the standard for assessing the value, where the implementer of a housing redevelopment project compensates a person who cannot acquire qualification as a member pursuant to Article 39 paragraphs (2) and (3) of the Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments / The meaning of 'market value' as the amount of loss compensation in this case
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
원심판결의 피고 패소 부분 중 매매를 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기청구와 인도청구 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다. 원고의 상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The portion of the judgment of the court below adverse to the defendant, insofar as it concerns the claim for registration of a transfer of ownership based on the sale and the claim for delivery, is reversed and remanded to the Seoul High Court. The plaintiff's final appeal is dismissed.
Provisions referred to
구 도시 및 주거환경정비법(2021. 4. 13. 법률 제18046호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제39조 제2항, 제3항, 구 도시 및 주거환경정비법 시행령(2020. 6. 23. 대통령령 제30797호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제37조 제1항, 집합건물의 소유 및 관리에 관한 법률 제48조 제4항
Read 2026-10-24 · Cross-read 2026-10-24. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger