How a Five-Line Lease Sparked a Five-Year Legal Nightmare

It began in Seoul with handshakes and hope — and ended in a Marshall Islands courtroom. In March 2020, just days before the world shut down, a small business deal was finalized between three Korean nationals. A property owner, Jiwoo Kwon, agreed to lease his building in Uliga, Majuro — later known in court filings as Seaglass Towers — to two young entrepreneurs, Minjae Park and Soojin Lee.

They met in Korea, where they drafted and signed a lease in their native language. Their plan was to take that agreement to Majuro and build a profitable mixed-use space — rentals, a café, a laundromat — right in the heart of Uliga.

The lease was handwritten in Korean and then translated into English without professional help. It consisted of just five one-line clauses and a rough sketch of the property. There were no provisions for repairs. There were no clauses on rent renegotiation. There were no dispute resolution mechanisms. Additionally, there was no legal review by anyone involved.

As the High Court later observed:

“The brevity of the lease, and the apparent failure to consult competent counsel in its drafting, may be the origin of many of the parties’ disputes.” — Chief Justice

By the time the parties arrived in the Marshall Islands to execute their plans, the cracks were already in the foundation, both legal and literal.

The Breakdown: COVID, Conflict & Clutter

Soon after the lease was signed, the COVID-19 pandemic struck. Borders closed, flights stopped, and tenants disappeared. Minjae and Soojin pleaded with Jiwoo to reduce the rent. Initially, he agreed to a temporary reduction: $2,500 for April and $4,000 per month for six months. However, by October 2020, Jiwoo insisted that the full rent of $7,000/month must resume. When Minjae refused, payments stopped. Tensions boiled.

To make matters worse, Jiwoo began using the lagoon-side parking lot — critical for customer access — as a dumping ground for broken-down vehicles. One rusted van blocked the café entrance entirely, with "MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS" scrawled across its side in bold black spray paint.

Blue Shore Co. claimed lost profits, dwindling customer traffic, and an uninhabitable building. Jiwoo countered with unpaid rent, accusing them of freeloading and subletting parts of the premises without consent.

The Courtroom: What the Judge Decided

On January 22, 2025, the High Court handed down its ruling in Kwon v. Park & Lee. The judgment focused on four core issues:

1. The Rent

The judge acknowledged the pandemic’s economic toll but found that both parties had agreed — albeit informally — that $4,000/month was a fair rate:

“Based upon the evidence presented, the Court finds that a monthly rent of $4,000 since October 2020 is fair and equitable.”

The Court ordered the Defendants to pay $4,000/month from October 2020 through March 2025, totaling over $200,000.

2. Repairs and Maintenance

Blue Shore Co. argued that the landlord had failed to maintain the building. However, the lease was silent on who bore this responsibility. The Court applied common law principles, which place the burden on the tenant in the absence of any specific agreement.

3. Lost Profits

The Defendants’ claim for lost profits due to the blocked lagoon-side entrance was rejected. Their evidence was deemed too speculative and did not meet the legal standard.

4. The Lease Itself

Ultimately, the root of the case was the lease. The Court’s frustration was clear:

“The parties prepared the lease without advice of counsel... the apparent failure to consult competent counsel... may be the origin of many of the parties’ disputes.”

The Real Lesson: Contracts Are Not DIY Projects

This wasn't just a fight over unpaid rent. It showcased what happens when individuals rely on informal agreements and unreviewed translations instead of seeking legal advice.

No matter how small your deal may seem, the cost of skipping legal guidance can be catastrophic. Here’s what this case teaches us:

✅ 1. A Lease Is More Than a Rent Amount

A proper lease sets out each party’s rights and duties. It should detail maintenance responsibilities, access rights, use of common areas, rent changes, and dispute resolution. Leaving anything vague invites confusion — and conflict.

✅ 2. Courts Enforce What’s Written—Not What’s Intended

If your lease lacks clarity, the court won’t guess your intentions. It will apply default legal rules, which may not favor your position.

✅ 3. Legal Advice Is Cheaper Than Legal Battles

Had this lease been reviewed by a lawyer, both parties could have avoided court. The cost of one legal review is minor compared to years of unpaid rent, stress, and litigation.

Final Word: The Building Wasn't the Only Thing That Cracked

Seaglass Towers could have been a Pacific success story. Instead, it became a cautionary tale of what not to do when signing a lease.

At Marsol Lawyers & Consultants, we help clients avoid — or untangle — legal disasters like this. Whether you’re leasing, selling, starting a business, or subletting space, get a lawyer. Let the paper protect your peace, not destroy it.

Five lines without a lawyer can lead to a lifetime of regret.

If you're in need of legal consultation, consider booking a session with us to help guide you through the complexities of your agreements.

Legal Consultation

60

Book Now