HUG 임대보증금보증과 임차인의 권리

This paper examines the lease deposit guarantee system operated by the Korea Housing & Urban Guarantee Corporation (HUG), focusing in particular on two issues: whether HUG may void a lease deposit guarantee contract due to fraudulent acts by the lessor, and whether the lessee’s claim for payment of the deposit may still be recognized. Recently, conflicting rulings from lower courts have heightened confusion and uncertainty regarding HUG’s obligation to pay lease deposits. Accordingly, analyzing and clarifying these issues is of both academic and practical significance. With respect to protecting the lessee, the beneficiary of the lease deposit guarantee, this study reaches the following conclusions: First, since the lease deposit guarantee constitutes a type of institutional guarantee that emphasizes public interest, the legal position of the lessee must be strongly protected. Second, where the lessee is a bona fide third party who has acquired independent interests based on a separate agreement from the underlying lease deposit guarantee, HUG’s ability to assert defenses based on the original guarantee should be limited. Third, the special provision in the former lease deposit guarantee terms and conditions—which allowed HUG to void the guarantee contract and refuse payment obligations on grounds of fraud—constitutes an unfair clause and therefore cannot be deemed legally effective.