[Reporter's Notebook] Reflect on Trust in Policy Rather Than Falling Home Prices

A 59-pyeong unit in Shin Hyundai Apartment in Apgujeong-dong, Gangnam, sold for 8.8 billion won last month. In July, a unit on a different floor in the same building changed hands for 11.25 billion won, meaning the price fell by 2.4 billion won in just three months. Transactions at prices reduced by hundreds of millions of won are also frequent for other unit sizes in the same complex, with cuts occurring over just two or three months. When President Lee Jaemyung said at a Cabinet meeting on November 3 that prices were “falling at a surprising rate,” he appeared to have individual transactions across the Gangnam area in mind.

Many people have responded cynically. They are not surprised that a property that once cost 5 billion won rose to 10 billion won and then fell by 1 billion or 2 billion won. The 59-pyeong unit at Apgujeong Shin Hyundai cited above was sold for 9.6 billion won last year. It sold for 6.9 billion won in 2024 and 5.8 billion won in 2023. It is hard to see whether a handful of cases so far removed from the lives of most ordinary and middle-class people warrant becoming a major topic at a gathering of the president and Cabinet members, or a matter of concern for policymakers.

That day, the president pointed to two problems: essential real estate information is not being properly communicated, and some groups that benefit from rising home prices tend to push a particular narrative. On his social media accounts, he also offered “advice” to potential homebuyers feeling pressured by panic buying, suggesting they look at Seoul apartment transaction volumes, listings, actual transaction prices in key areas, mortgage delinquency rates, and auction volumes.

I see this as a dangerous way of thinking. It risks creating a narrative in which an uninformed public makes poor decisions because it lacks access to information, while political leaders struggle to set things right. It may rally supporters, but it does not help implement policy. Whether intended or not, real estate policy becomes a subject of political conflict.

It is also unwise to divide those who benefit into two opposing camps and criticize them. Can we call it wrongdoing when people pursue their interests through legal means, each in their own circumstances? In the president’s own words, the government’s job is to redesign the rules so that practices that once brought benefits no longer do.

Some say the domestic housing market has reached a point where “no remedy is effective.” This is because the public has lost faith in real estate policy. Rather than simply urging that information be communicated properly, I believe the priority should be to recognize and reflect on the troubling decline in trust in real estate policy.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.