Kim Nam-guk: "Yoon Hee-sook, Don't Pretend to Worry About Tenants While Taking Care of Landlords"

"The premise that the revision of the Housing Lease Protection Act will cause a surge in Jeonse prices is incorrect"

Kim Nam-guk, Member of the Democratic Party of Korea / Photo by Yonhap News

[Asia Economy Reporter Lim Ju-hyung] Kim Nam-guk, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, criticized Yoon Hee-sook of the United Future Party, who expressed concerns that the Jeonse system could disappear as a side effect of the amendment to the Housing Lease Protection Act, saying, "Don't pretend to worry about tenants while trying to look out for landlords."

On the 2nd, Kim wrote on his Facebook, "I thought Representative Yoon was someone who had lived a difficult life as a tenant all her life, dreaming of owning her own home, but until a few days ago, she was a multi-homeowner and is currently a landlord who seems to have become a tenant just a few months ago to run for Seocho-gap."

He continued, "I could not find any concrete evidence for Yoon's claim that 'the three lease laws accelerate the shift from Jeonse to monthly rent,' and isn't the premise that Jeonse prices will skyrocket again in four years because they rose after the amendment to the Housing Lease Protection Act 30 years ago fundamentally flawed?"

Kim said, "Prices are determined by housing prices, supply and demand of rental housing, inflation rate, and other economic conditions," adding, "It is a rather absurd story that landlords, who try to maximize returns in the market, would suddenly change their minds and lend houses for free even to relatives."

He further pointed out, "There may be landlords who want to switch to monthly rent, but this is not because of the three lease laws, but because of low interest rates and the lack of investment options to protect and grow large sums of money."

Regarding Yoon's claim that "not only tenants who pay high Jeonse deposits but also elderly landlords living solely on rental income should be considered," Kim said, "Elderly landlords who make a living from rent without earned income can simply continue to receive monthly rent, so I do not understand what more consideration they need," and criticized, "I cannot understand how strengthening tenant protection at the state's expense leads to appropriate compensation for landlords."