Open Decision Ledger · Civil obligations & remedies
Business registration as publicity for a lease change
Supreme Court, June 25, 2026, 2026Da201494 (judgment)
Case name: 임료
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Under Article 3(1) of the Act on the Protection of Lease Transactions for Commercial Buildings, may a tenant assert against a new landlord who acquired the building a rent waiver agreed with the former landlord but never publicised, such as by a correction report on its business registration?
Holding
Business registration is a means of publicity for transactional safety, so whether it publicises a given lease depends on whether the existence and content of that lease can be perceived through it as a matter of general social common sense. A rent waiver that makes the lease more favourable to the tenant may therefore be asserted against a new landlord only if the change has been made public, as by being entered in the statement of commercial building lease information through a correction report on the business registration.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
임차인과 임대인 사이의 약정을 통해 차임이 면제되는 등 상가건물 임대차계약 내용이 임차인에게 유리하게 변경되었다고 하더라도 사업자등록 정정신고를 통해 그 변경 사항이 상가건물 임대차 현황서에 기재되는 등으로 공시되지 않는 이상 임차인은 그 변경으로써 상가건물을 양수한 새로운 임대인에게 대항할 수 없다.
Unofficial English translation
Even where the terms of a commercial building lease contract, such as exemption of rent, are modified in favor of the lessee by agreement between the lessee and the lessor, unless the modification is made public, such as by being entered in the current status statement of the commercial building lease through a report of correction of business registration, the lessee cannot assert the modification against a new lessor who has acquired the commercial building.
Disposition
Reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 수원지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Suwon District Court.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
사업자등록이 어떤 임대차를 공시하는 효력이 있는지는 일반 사회통념상 그 사업자등록을 통하여 해당 건물에 관한 임대차의 존재와 내용을 인식할 수 있는가에 따라 판단해야 한다
Unofficial English translation
Whether business registration has the effect of making a particular lease public must be determined according to whether, under ordinary social understanding, the existence and content of the lease concerning the building can be recognized through that business registration
Factors
- 보증금·임차료 또는 임대차기간의 변경이 있는 때에는 사업자등록 정정신고서를 제출해야 한다.
- 거래 안전을 위하여 임대차의 존재와 내용을 제3자가 명백히 인식할 수 있게 하는 공시방법으로서 마련된 것이므로
- 임차인과 임대인 사이의 약정을 통해 차임이 면제되는 등 상가건물 임대차계약 내용이 임차인에게 유리하게 변경되었다고 하더라도
- 그 변경 사항이 상가건물 임대차 현황서에 기재되는 등으로 공시되지 않는 이상
Unofficial English translation
• Where there is a change in the security deposit, rent, or lease term, a report of correction of business registration must be submitted.
• since it was prepared as a method of publication, for the safety of transactions, to enable a third party to clearly recognize the existence and content of the lease,
• Even where the terms of a commercial building lease contract, such as exemption of rent, are modified in favor of the lessee by agreement between the lessee and the lessor,
• unless the modification is made public, such as by being entered in the current status statement of the commercial building lease,
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2016. 6. 9. 선고 2013다215676 판결(공2016하, 907)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2013Da215676 decided June 9, 2016 (Gong 2016 Ha, 907)
Decisions referred to
[1] 대법원 2016. 6. 9. 선고 2013다215676 판결(공2016하, 907)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
Besides entry in the statement of commercial building lease information, what other means may publicise a change to a commercial lease for the right to assert under Article 3(1)?
The remand judgment, once it decides whether the rent waiver was publicised, will show how the requirement applies to the memoranda of 21 August 2013 and 15 January 2018. An amendment to Article 3(1) of the Act, to Article 8 of the Value-Added Tax Act or to the related Enforcement Decree and rules would also require a fresh reading.
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 Suwon District Court, in its judgment of 8 January 2026 (2025Na53052), held that the agreement between the non-party lessor and the defendant changed the lease so as to waive the monthly rent of KRW 400,000. The defendant could therefore assert that waiver against the plaintiff, who had bought the building at auction and acquired ownership on 29 September 2020, succeeding to the lessor's position.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that under the Value-Added Tax Act a change to the deposit, rent or lease term has to be reported, and that an interested person may read the resulting information in the statement of commercial building lease information. It found that the memorandum of 21 August 2013 only extinguished the lessor's rent claim and the defendant's purchase price claim to the extent of their equal amounts, and did not change the lease itself. Because the court below never examined whether the alleged change had been publicised, it had misread the law on publicity and the right to assert and had failed to conduct the necessary examination, so the judgment was reversed and sent back to the Suwon District Court.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case in which the change was made public, for instance by a correction report on the business registration entered in the statement of commercial building lease information.
- An arrangement that does not itself change the lease, such as extinguishing the rent claim and the purchase price claim to the extent of their equal amounts.
Record verification notes
Take the business registration record for the building and the statement of commercial building lease information from the competent tax office, and set each entry's date and content against the date on which the change is said to have been agreed. Then separate what changed the lease from what merely extinguished existing claims, and check which version of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act and which version of the rules on definite dates governed.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 상가건물 임대차보호법 제3조 제1항에서 대항력의 요건으로 ‘사업자등록’을 규정한 취지 및 사업자등록이 어떤 임대차를 공시하는 효력이 있는지 판단하는 기준 [2] 임차인과 임대인 사이의 약정을 통해 차임이 면제되는 등 상가건물 임대차계약 내용이 임차인에게 유리하게 변경되었으나 사업자등록 정정신고를 통해 그 변경 사항이 상가건물 임대차 현황서에 기재되는 등으로 공시되지 아니한 경우, 임차인이 그 변경으로써 상가건물을 양수한 새로운 임대인에게 대항할 수 있는지 여부(소극)
Unofficial English translation
[1] The purpose of stipulating "business registration" as a requirement for the effect against third parties in Article 3(1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, and the criteria for determining whether business registration has the effect of making a particular lease public [2] Even where the terms of a commercial building lease contract, such as exemption of rent, are modified in favor of the lessee by agreement between the lessee and the lessor, if the modification is not made public, such as by being entered in the current status statement of the commercial building lease through a report of correction of business registration, whether the lessee can assert against a new lessor who has acquired the commercial building by virtue of such modification (negative)
Summary of the holding
[1] 상가건물 임대차보호법 제3조 제1항에서 건물 인도와 더불어 대항력의 요건으로 규정하고 있는 ‘사업자등록’은 거래 안전을 위하여 임대차의 존재와 내용을 제3자가 명백히 인식할 수 있게 하는 공시방법으로서 마련된 것이므로, 사업자등록이 어떤 임대차를 공시하는 효력이 있는지는 일반 사회통념상 그 사업자등록을 통하여 해당 건물에 관한 임대차의 존재와 내용을 인식할 수 있는가에 따라 판단해야 한다. [2] 부가가치세법 제8조 제1항, 제2항, 제12항, 구 부가가치세법 시행령(2024. 2. 29. 대통령령 제34270호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제11조 제1항, 제3항, 제14조 제1항 제7호(위 규정들은 소득세법 및 법인세법상 사업자등록에도 준용된다)에 따르면, 사업장을 임차한 사업자가 사업자등록을 할 때 세무서장에게 임대차계약서 사본을 첨부한 사업자등록 신청서를 제출해야 하고, 보증금·임차료 또는 임대차기간의 변경이 있는 때에는 사업자등록 정정신고서를 제출해야 한다. 또한 상가건물 임대차보호법 제4조 제3항, 상가건물 임대차보호법 시행령 제3조의3 제2항, 제3항, 구 상가건물 임대차계약서상의 확정일자 부여 및 임대차 정보제공에 관한 규칙(2022. 2. 7. 법무부령 제1022호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제6조 제1항에 따르면, 상가건물 임대차에 이해관계가 있는 사람은 관할 세무서장에게 해당 상가건물의 확정일자 부여일, 차임 및 보증금 등 정보의 제공을 요청하여 위 정보가 기재된 ‘상가건물 임대차 현황서’를 열람하거나 교부받을 수 있다. 이러한 관련 규정의 내용 등을 종합해 보면, 임차인과 임대인 사이의 약정을 통해 차임이 면제되는 등 상가건물 임대차계약 내용이 임차인에게 유리하게 변경되었다고 하더라도 사업자등록 정정신고를 통해 그 변경 사항이 상가건물 임대차 현황서에 기재되는 등으로 공시되지 않는 이상 임차인은 그 변경으로써 상가건물을 양수한 새로운 임대인에게 대항할 수 없다.
Order
원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 수원지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Suwon District Court.
Provisions referred to
[1] 상가건물 임대차보호법 제3조 제1항 / [2] 상가건물 임대차보호법 제3조 제1항, 제2항, 제4조 제3항, 상가건물 임대차보호법 시행령 제3조의3 제2항, 제3항, 구 상가건물 임대차계약서상의 확정일자 부여 및 임대차 정보제공에 관한 규칙(2022. 2. 7. 법무부령 제1022호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제6조 제1항, 부가가치세법 제8조 제1항, 제2항, 제12항, 구 부가가치세법 시행령(2024. 2. 29. 대통령령 제34270호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제11조 제1항, 제3항, 제14조 제1항 제7호, 소득세법 제168조, 법인세법 제111조
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