A court has ruled that if the move-in date is delayed by more than a year from the date stated in the sales notice, a buyer is entitled to terminate the contract and receive a refund of the purchase price, even if the contract contains clauses on changes to the move-in schedule or force majeure.
According to legal sources on the 18th, Ulsan District Court Civil Division 15 single-judge Director General Woo Jeong-min partially ruled in favor of a plaintiff in a suit filed by a person identified as A seeking a return of the purchase price from Ulsan B Housing Cooperative. The court ordered the cooperative to pay A about 27 million won plus delayed interest.
In 2021, A purchased a presale right for an officetel in a residential-commercial complex promoted by B Cooperative and paid a little over 37 million won as the purchase price. The supply contract specified Aug. 2024 as the expected move-in date.
However, the cooperative repeatedly postponed the move-in date, citing construction complaints, labor shortages due to COVID-19, higher material prices after the Ukraine-Russia war, and a Cargo Solidarity strike. Ultimately, approval for use was delayed to Sept. 2025, more than a year later than the initial date. A argued the move-in would be far too late and demanded to terminate the contract and receive a refund of the purchase price.
The cooperative refused, saying the contract included clauses such as "the expected move-in date may be adjusted somewhat depending on progress" and "when move-in is delayed due to natural disasters or force majeure, termination cannot be demanded," and A filed suit.
The court sided with A. It found that the contract clauses presented by the cooperative could not be interpreted to allow unlimited, arbitrary changes to the expected move-in date. It said the expected move-in date is a key factor that directly affects a buyer's financing plans and moving schedule, creating a strong need for protection on that premise.
The court said that while some unforeseeable variables can arise during construction, a delay of more than a year from the expected completion date constitutes grounds for termination. It also found that circumstances such as COVID-19 and international conflicts cited by the cooperative were largely foreseeable at the time of presale.
The court ordered the cooperative to offset the interest on the interest-free, mid-payment bank loan it paid on A's behalf under the sales terms and then return the deposit A paid.