Court Dismisses Injunction Request Against 'October 15 Real Estate Policy'... Reform Party (South Korea) Considers Appeal

Financial News – The court has ruled that the government's October 15 Real Estate Policy, which designated all of Seoul and parts of Gyeonggi Province as regulated areas, is lawful.
The 14th Division of the Seoul Administrative Court, presided over by Presiding Judge Lee Sang-deok of the 14th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court, on the 29th ruled against the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed by the Reform Party (South Korea) and about 300 residents of regulated areas against the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, seeking confirmation of the nullity of the designation of an Area Subject to Adjustment and a suspension of the enforcement of the real estate policy.
The court rejected the plaintiffs' argument that the September statistics had not been reflected. It explained that under the current Housing Act, the authorities may use statistics from the closest available month even if data for September are not yet compiled. The court stated, "Given that the September statistics had not been published by the day before the Housing Policy Deliberative Committee convened, it is difficult to regard the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport's failure to reflect the September data in the process of designating Areas Subject to Adjustment as a factual error amounting to a departure from and abuse of discretionary authority."
Earlier, the Reform Party (South Korea) had filed suit, claiming that some of the statistical data used in the government's October 15 Real Estate Policy announced last year were flawed. The party argued that eight locations — Dobong District in Seoul, Gangbuk District, Jungnang District, Geumcheon District, Uiwang, Jungwon District, Seongnam, Jangan District, Suwon, and Paldal District — could not legitimately be designated as Areas Subject to Adjustment. According to their claim, the government intentionally manipulated housing price statistics and imposed excessive regulations by including areas where the degree of market overheating was relatively mild. They asserted that although the government designed the regulatory plan based on Korea Real Estate Board (KREB) data from June to August, it had already received the September data by October 13 last year, two days before the announcement, but chose not to reflect them. Once an area is designated as a regulated zone, residents face restrictions on loans, housing subscriptions, and taxation.
However, the court noted that even if new figures are released between the time the Housing Policy Deliberative Committee reaches its decision and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport announces the Areas Subject to Adjustment, allowing the ministry to change the decision at will would run counter to the purpose of the Housing Act. For this reason, the court found that using the closest three months of data (June to August) when the September figures had not yet been released was not unlawful. This is seen as a rejection of the plaintiffs' arguments.
The court further stated, "At the time of the designation of the Areas Subject to Adjustment, the housing market was overheating, so the defendant's choice of when to convene the committee and when to issue the designation appears to have been a policy decision aimed at responding in a timely manner to that overheating." It emphasized, "By contrast, there is no evidence to suggest that the timing was chosen deliberately to avoid reflecting the September statistics."
The Reform Party (South Korea), which brought the lawsuit, announced that it is considering an appeal. After the ruling, Chun Ha-ram, the party's parliamentary leader, told reporters, "This is a very disappointing outcome for us," adding, "Because this is a ruling that we find difficult to accept, we plan to review the written judgment, and if we identify multiple logical problems, we will actively consider filing an appeal."
theknight@fnnews.com Jung Kyung-soo, Choi Ah-young Reporter