Open Decision Ledger · Civil obligations & remedies
Lease deemed to continue until the deposit is returned, and the transferee's succession
Supreme Court, Apr. 9, 2026, 2023Da307116 (judgment)
Case name: 건물인도
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where a commercial lease has ended by expiry or agreement, is the lease relationship still deemed to continue until the lessee recovers the deposit, and does a transferee who then acquires the property succeed as landlord, taking on the deposit repayment obligation and releasing the transferor?
Holding
Yes. The lease relationship is deemed to continue until the deposit is returned, so that the lessee's possession is protected as strongly as before the term ended and the deposit claim is secured in substance. Where the lessee has opposition power and the property is then transferred, the transferee succeeds as landlord by operation of law, taking the whole of the landlord's contractual rights and obligations together with ownership, so the transferee assumes the deposit repayment obligation and the transferor is released from it.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
대항력 있는 상가임대차에서 기간만료나 당사자의 합의 등으로 임대차가 종료된 경우에도 상가건물 임대차보호법 제9조 제2항에 의하여 임차인은 보증금을 반환받을 때까지 임대차관계가 존속하는 것으로 의제되므로 그러한 상태에서 임차목적물인 부동산이 양도되는 경우에는 같은 법 제3조 제2항에 의하여 양수인에게 임대차가 종료된 상태에서의 임대인으로서의 지위가 당연히 승계된다.
Unofficial English translation
Even where a commercial building lease with effectiveness against third parties is terminated upon the expiration of the term or by agreement of the parties, the lease relationship is deemed to continue until the lessee receives the return of the deposit pursuant to Article 9 (2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, and accordingly, where real estate that is the leased object is transferred in such a state, the position of the lessor in the terminated state of the lease is automatically succeeded to by the transferee pursuant to Article 3 (2) of the same Act.
Disposition
Partly reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결 중 임대차보증금 반환청구 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 서울중앙지방법원에 환송한다. 나머지 상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The portion of the judgment of the court below concerning the claim for return of the lease deposit is reversed and remanded to the Seoul Central District Court; the remainder of the final appeal is dismissed.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
이 조항은 임차인이 취득하는 대항력의 내용을 정한 것으로, 상가건물의 임차인이 제3자에 대한 대항력을 취득한 다음 임차건물의 양도 등으로 소유자가 변동된 경우에는 양수인 등 새로운 소유자가 임대인의 지위를 당연히 승계한다는 의미이다.
Unofficial English translation
This provision prescribes the content of the effectiveness against third parties acquired by the lessee, and it means that, where the owner of the commercial building changes through a transfer of the leased building or the like after the lessee has acquired effectiveness against third parties, the transferee or other new owner automatically succeeds to the position of the lessor.
Factors
- 기간만료나 당사자의 합의 등으로 임대차가 종료된 경우에도
- 상가건물 임대차보호법 제9조 제2항에 의하여 임차인은 보증금을 반환받을 때까지 임대차관계가 존속하는 것으로 의제되므로
- 상가건물의 임차인이 제3자에 대한 대항력을 취득한 다음 임차건물의 양도 등으로 소유자가 변동된 경우에는
- 양수인은 임대차보증금 반환채무를 면책적으로 인수하고, 양도인은 임대차관계에서 탈퇴하여 임차인에 대한 임대차보증금 반환채무를 면하게 된다.
Unofficial English translation
• Even where a lease is terminated upon the expiration of the term or by agreement of the parties,
• the lease relationship is deemed to continue until the lessee receives the return of the deposit pursuant to Article 9 (2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, and therefore
• where the owner of the commercial building changes through a transfer of the leased building or the like after the lessee has acquired effectiveness against third parties,
• the transferee assumes the obligation to return the lease deposit in such a manner as to discharge the transferor, and the transferor withdraws from the lease relationship and is released from the obligation to return the lease deposit to the lessee.
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2020. 7. 9. 선고 2016다244224, 244231 판결(공2020하, 1563), 대법원 2023. 11. 9. 선고 2023다257600 판결(공2024상, 15)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2016Da244224, 244231 decided July 9, 2020 (Gong 2020 Ha, 1563); Supreme Court Decision 2023Da257600 decided November 9, 2023 (Gong 2024 Sang, 15)
Decisions referred to
[1] 대법원 2020. 7. 9. 선고 2016다244224, 244231 판결(공2020하, 1563), 대법원 2023. 11. 9. 선고 2023다257600 판결(공2024상, 15) / [2] 대법원 2017. 3. 22. 선고 2016다218874 판결(공2017상, 841), 대법원 2021. 1. 28. 선고 2015다59801 판결(공2021상, 453)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
If a lessee without opposition power loses possession after the lease ends, what route, if any, remains for recovering the deposit from the transferee or the transferor?
The remanded judgment of the Seoul Central District Court, once it finds whether the plaintiff had opposition power, will show how the succession rule applies to these facts. Any amendment to Article 3 or Article 9(2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, or a later decision changing the reading of succession on a terminated lease, would require this entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 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 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “If a lessee without opposition power loses possession after the lease ends, what route, if any, remains for recovering the deposit from the transferee or the transferor?” vs Independent “Can a tenant's objection to the transferee's succession preserve the transferor's deposit repayment obligation?”
The primary reading asks about deposit recovery by a tenant lacking opposability who loses possession, whereas the independent reading asks whether an objection to succession preserves the transferor's liability.
대항력 있는 상가임대차에서 기간만료나 당사자의 합의 등으로 임대차가 종료된 경우에도 상가건물 임대차보호법 제9조 제2항에 의하여 임차인은 보증금을 반환받을 때까지 임대차관계가 존속하는 것으로 의제되므로 그러한 상태에서 임차목적물인 부동산이 양도되는 경우에는 같은 법 제3조 제2항에 의하여 양수인에게 임대차가 종료된 상태에서의 임대인으로서의 지위가 당연히 승계된다.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 Central District Court, in its judgment of 21 November 2023 (2023Na14222), held that the defendant did not succeed to the landlord's status because the lease of the shop had ended by expiry of its term on 31 December 2021. On that basis it rejected the plaintiff's claim for return of the deposit, the claim for damages obstructing recovery of the key money, and the claim for damages equal to lost trading profits for the period from 6 April 2022 to 31 December 2022.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that the court below never examined whether the plaintiff had opposition power, and misread the law on opposition power under Article 3 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act and on the continuation of the lease relationship under Article 9(2), with an error affecting the outcome on the deposit claim, which was reversed and remanded. On the key money claim the reasoning was also improper, but the result stood: the management plan had been approved and published, the scheduled relocation period had passed, the reconstruction project had substantially progressed, and the lease contained a special term to deliver the shop during the relocation period, so obstruction could not be found. No error affecting the outcome was found on the lost profits claim, and the rest of the appeals was dismissed.
Distinguishing conditions
- A lessee who has not acquired opposition power under Article 3 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, since the succession of the landlord's status was stated to follow where the lessee has that power.
- A transfer in which the property is not conveyed to a new owner, since Article 3(2) speaks of a transferee where ownership has changed.
- A key money obstruction claim where the reconstruction project has not substantially progressed, or the lease contains no term to deliver the shop during the relocation period, since the Court relied on those facts.
Record verification notes
Set the date on which the lessee registered against the date of the transfer or the trust registration, here 19 January 2022, and confirm the opposition power before relying on the succession rule. Then read the lease for any special term on delivery during a relocation period, and check the approval and publication of the management plan and the elapsed relocation period, since those facts kept the key money claim out of the outcome. Note that the deposit claim alone was reversed, so the disposition of the other two claims tells you nothing about their merits on a different record.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 상가건물 임대차에서 기간만료나 당사자의 합의 등으로 임대차가 종료된 경우에도 상가건물 임대차보호법 제9조 제2항에 따라 임차인이 보증금을 반환받을 때까지 임대차관계가 존속하는 것으로 의제되는지 여부(적극) [2] 상가건물 임대차보호법 제3조에 따라 상가건물의 임차인이 제3자에 대한 대항력을 취득한 다음 임차건물의 양도 등으로 소유자가 변동된 경우, 양수인 등 새로운 소유자가 임대인의 지위를 당연히 승계하는지 여부(적극) [3] 대항력 있는 상가임대차에서 기간만료나 당사자의 합의 등으로 임대차가 종료된 상태에서 임차목적물인 부동산이 양도되는 경우, 양수인은 임대차보증금 반환채무를 면책적으로 인수하고 양도인은 임대차보증금 반환채무를 면하게 되는지 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
[1] Whether, even where a commercial building lease is terminated upon the expiration of the term or by agreement of the parties, the lease relationship is deemed to continue until the lessee receives the return of the deposit pursuant to Article 9 (2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (affirmative) [2] Whether, where the owner of the leased building changes through a transfer of the leased building or the like after the lessee of the commercial building has acquired effectiveness against third parties pursuant to Article 3 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, the transferee or other new owner automatically succeeds to the position of the lessor (affirmative) [3] Whether, where real estate that is the leased object is transferred in a state where a commercial building lease with effectiveness against third parties has been terminated upon the expiration of the term or by agreement of the parties, the transferee assumes the obligation to return the lease deposit in such a manner as to discharge the transferor and the transferor is released from the obligation to return the lease deposit (affirmative)
Summary of the holding
[1] 상가건물 임대차에서 기간만료나 당사자의 합의 등으로 임대차가 종료된 경우에도 상가건물 임대차보호법 제9조 제2항에 의하여 임차인은 보증금을 반환받을 때까지 임대차관계가 존속하는 것으로 의제된다. 이는 임대차기간이 끝난 후에도 상가건물의 임차인이 보증금을 반환받을 때까지는 임차인의 목적물에 대한 점유를 임대차기간이 끝나기 전과 마찬가지 정도로 강하게 보호함으로써 임차인의 보증금반환채권을 실질적으로 보장하기 위한 것이다. [2] 상가건물 임대차보호법 제3조는 ‘대항력 등’이라는 표제로 제1항에서 대항력의 요건을 정하고, 제2항에서 "임차건물의 양수인(그 밖에 임대할 권리를 승계한 자를 포함한다)은 임대인의 지위를 승계한 것으로 본다."라고 정하고 있다. 이 조항은 임차인이 취득하는 대항력의 내용을 정한 것으로, 상가건물의 임차인이 제3자에 대한 대항력을 취득한 다음 임차건물의 양도 등으로 소유자가 변동된 경우에는 양수인 등 새로운 소유자가 임대인의 지위를 당연히 승계한다는 의미이다. [3] 대항력 있는 상가임대차에서 기간만료나 당사자의 합의 등으로 임대차가 종료된 경우에도 상가건물 임대차보호법 제9조 제2항에 의하여 임차인은 보증금을 반환받을 때까지 임대차관계가 존속하는 것으로 의제되므로 그러한 상태에서 임차목적물인 부동산이 양도되는 경우에는 같은 법 제3조 제2항에 의하여 양수인에게 임대차가 종료된 상태에서의 임대인으로서의 지위가 당연히 승계된다. 이는 법률상 당연승계 규정으로 보아야 하므로, 상가건물이 양도된 경우에 그 양수인은 상가건물의 소유권과 결합하여 임대인의 임대차계약상의 권리·의무 일체를 그대로 승계한다. 그 결과 양수인은 임대차보증금 반환채무를 면책적으로 인수하고, 양도인은 임대차관계에서 탈퇴하여 임차인에 대한 임대차보증금 반환채무를 면하게 된다.
Order
원심판결 중 임대차보증금 반환청구 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 서울중앙지방법원에 환송한다. 나머지 상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The portion of the judgment of the court below concerning the claim for return of the lease deposit is reversed and remanded to the Seoul Central District Court; the remainder of the final appeal is dismissed.
Provisions referred to
[1] 상가건물 임대차보호법 제9조 제2항 / [2] 상가건물 임대차보호법 제3조 제1항, 제2항 / [3] 상가건물 임대차보호법 제3조 제1항, 제2항, 제9조 제2항
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