Soldier Nearing Discharge Denied Request to Remain in Military Housing... Court Rules "Justified Action"

Court Rules Military Not Obligated to Guarantee Residence in Specific Housing Units
Broad Discretion Granted to Military Authorities on Eviction Deferments

A soldier who was about to be discharged applied for a deferment of eviction from military housing, but the court has ruled that the military's decision to deny this request was justified.

According to the legal community on September 8, the 11th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Kim Junyoung) recently ruled against the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by Mr. A against the Commander of the Republic of Korea Chemical, Biological, and Radiological Defense Command, seeking to nullify the decision not to approve his request for a deferment of eviction from military housing.

Mr. A, who was commissioned in 2000, served at the Chemical, Biological, and Radiological Defense Command and lived in military housing in Songpa District. In 2021, he was transferred to another unit, but since his child was still in high school at the time, he was granted a deferment of eviction until February 2024 in accordance with regulations. Later, ahead of his scheduled discharge in January 2025, he reapplied for a deferment, citing a regulation that allows for such a request if discharge is within one year. However, the military denied his request, citing increased demand for housing due to remodeling work at other residences.

Mr. A filed a lawsuit claiming that the denial constituted an unlawful abuse of discretion, but the court did not accept his argument. The court stated, "While the provision of military housing is intended to support the stable lives of soldiers, there is no obligation to guarantee residence in a specific unit," and added, "The military authorities are granted broad discretion regarding the use of and deferment of eviction from military housing." The court also pointed out, "This particular housing unit is highly sought after, and due to ongoing construction at other units, there are many people waiting to move in. It is necessary to give new applicants an opportunity rather than granting another deferment to the plaintiff, who has already received one." It was also revealed that in 2023, the military had already informed the plaintiff that "the deferment of eviction for 2024 would be restricted, so he should apply for housing at his new unit or seek assistance for private housing."

The court further stated, "The plaintiff has not been newly transferred to a different duty station, and the reason for impending discharge was already included in the initial deferment," adding, "Even if there were some minor flaws in the exercise of discretion, they are not serious or obvious enough to render the decision invalid." The court dismissed the plaintiff's claim and ordered him to bear the litigation costs.