"Submit Certificate of Employment to Prove Residence"… Ministry of Land Considers Revising LTPZ Permit Guidelines [Real Estate AtoZ]

Proof of Residence or Reason for Living in Adjacent Areas Required
Divergent Interpretations of the Directive Among Local Governments
Some Districts Request Certificate of Enrollment
Ministry of Land Considering Standardized Guidelines

As 12 locations in Seoul and Gyeonggi Province have been designated as Land Transaction Permission Zones (LTPZ), disputes are arising over the requirements for land transaction permits. The confusion stems from differing interpretations among local governments regarding a Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport directive that requires applicants to explain their residence in, or reason for residing in, a city or county adjacent to the regulated area. The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport is now reviewing measures to standardize the requirements for supporting documents.

According to the real estate industry on November 7, Suji District Office in Yongin City provided guidance on the permit requirements for the designated LTPZ through its official website. The guidance states that when purchasing residential land within the permit zone, buyers must specifically and objectively explain their residence in, or reason for residing in, an adjacent city or county. This directive is based on the Ministry’s “Land Transaction Work Processing Guidelines.” All local governments within LTPZs are required to follow the same standards.

However, interpretations differ among local governments. Suji District Office specified the adjacent cities and counties as Seongnam, Uiwang, Suwon, Hwaseong, Pyeongtaek, Anseong, Icheon, and Gwangju. The office also stated that buyers who do not reside in these areas must objectively explain their reason for residence. The land use plan, which must be submitted to prove the reason for residence, lists a certificate of enrollment and a certificate of employment as supporting documents. As this guidance spread online, complaints have been raised that it infringes on the freedom to change residence.

Following a flood of civil complaints, Suji District Office removed the references to the “range of adjacent cities and counties” and the list of supporting documents from its guidance. An official from the office explained, “The directive does not specify concrete or objective documentation requirements, so we included them as examples. Due to the high volume of complaints, we have revised the guidance, and if the reason for residence is sufficiently explained, a permit can be granted even without documents such as a certificate of employment.”

Yonhap News.

In contrast, major districts in Seoul and Bundang District Office in Seongnam City are granting permits as long as the reason for residence is reasonably explained. They do not separately specify the range of adjacent cities and counties. An official from Seongdong District Office in Seoul said, “While we do require documents such as a certificate of resident registration during the permit process, a certificate of enrollment is not required. If applicants provide common and valid reasons, such as a child’s school transfer or job relocation, a permit can be granted.” An official from Bundang District Office in Seongnam City also stated, “If the reason for moving listed in the land use plan is reasonable, we do not require additional explanations.”

This controversy stems from ambiguous regulations in the Ministry’s directive. The current guidelines only state, “Specify residence in or reason for residing in an adjacent city or county,” but do not define the range of adjacent areas or provide concrete methods for explaining the reason for residence.

The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport announced that it will establish unified and detailed guidelines for use by local governments. A ministry official stated, “The directive is intended to verify whether applicants genuinely intend to reside in the area and to prevent abuse during the permit process. However, since the directive does not uniformly define the relevant regions and the requirements for explanation vary by permitting authority, we are considering establishing standardized guidelines for review materials, supporting documents, and the definition of adjacent cities and counties.”