[서울=뉴스핌] Reporter Lee Dong-hoon = The plan to remove the obligation to live in flats for sale was postponed in the Legislative Sub-Committee of the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee of the National Assembly. The recent charter fraud issues in Michuhol-gu, Incheon and Dongtan, Gyeonggi-do seem to have had an impact.
On the morning of the 26th, the National Land and Transport Committee’s National Land Law Review Sub-Committee began reviewing the amendment to the Housing Act, which included the abolition of compulsory residence, but failed to close the gap between the opposition parties and the opposition parties. The sub-committee is due to resume discussion at the extraordinary meeting of the National Assembly in May scheduled for the 10th of next month.
| On the 26th, the amendment to abolish compulsory residence was postponed in the Legislative Sub-Committee of the National Assembly. An apartment complex seen from the 63 Square Observatory in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul.[사진=김보나 기자] |
This amendment is a subsequent measure to the ‘1·3 Real Estate Measure’, the main point of which is to abolish the obligation to live in the house for 2 to 5 years, which is applied to boarding houses areas where the selling price. ceiling system is applied. Members of the ruling party are calling for the amendment to be passed, but opposition lawmakers are known to oppose it, saying they are concerned about the side effects of rising house prices.
Previously, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport reviewed the Housing Act Enforcement Decree, and from the 7th, the longest period for the resale of lot rights in the metropolitan area was 3 years for public housing sites, regulated areas and areas that subject to the upper limit on the selling price, 1 year for overcrowded areas, and 6 months for other areas. Restrictions on resale can only be eased by amending the government’s enforcement ordinance.
Although the period for the resale of pre-sale rights has been shortened, it is difficult to see the effect of deregulation if the actual residence obligation is maintained.
The opposition parties and civic groups believe that abolishing the residence obligation can really encourage non-capital gap investment (buying a house with jeonse). As a result, charter fraud is also very likely to increase.
leedh@newspim.com
