Seoul mayoral election, housing responsibility debate intensifies... Jeong Won-oh vs. Woo Shik-hoon

With the Seoul mayoral election approaching, Democratic Party candidate Jeong Won-oh and People Power Party candidate Woo Seok-hoon will square off on the 3rd over who is responsible for real estate issues.

The core of this attack-and-defense exchange is to blame the other side for Seoul’s housing supply shortage and the instability of both housing prices and jeonse (all-rent) prices. Candidate Jeong’s side criticized that during Woo’s tenure overseeing Seoul’s municipal government, he failed to expand supply and deliver any substantive results, and also failed to strongly push the Yoon Suk-yeol government to expand housing supply. By commenting, National Assembly member Lee Jeong-hyun and spokesperson Park Kyoung-mi emphasized that it was the People Power Party camp that, over the past 3 to 5 years, actually bore responsibility shared between the central government and the Seoul city government. They argued that proposing an expansion of supply on the eve of the election is an attempt to evade responsibility afterward.

The Democratic Party side also specifically pointed out that regarding policies directly related to supply—such as redevelopment and reconstruction—Woo’s touted achievements are not sufficient. In Seoul’s housing market, policy effects are difficult to show immediately because of the long lead times for supply. However, the pace of permits or the degree of progress in preparatory (redevelopment) works is regarded as an important signal for the future volume of supply. Candidate Jeong’s side stressed that they can carry out preparatory works faster and more steadily, and retaliated by saying that Woo’s responses were defensive reactions stemming from weak performance.

In response, Woo’s side countered that the fundamental cause of instability in Seoul’s real estate market lies in the Democratic Party’s policy failures. Spokesperson Lee Chang-geun claimed that during the Moon Jae-in government, apartment prices surged, a shortage of jeonse homes emerged, and increases in monthly rent compounded the burden on Seoul residents’ housing costs—so responsibility should be assigned to Democratic figures, including Candidate Jeong. Spokesperson Cho Yong-suk also cited real-world circumstances such as the average jeonse price for apartments in Seoul exceeding 680 million won, accused the current government’s policy stance of fueling an overheating real estate market in the capital region, and criticized that housing burdens have increased for ordinary people and first-time buyers with urgent housing needs.

Real estate is often viewed as the most sensitive issue in the Seoul mayoral election. While the mayor of Seoul does not directly set taxes, they can still exert major influence on the market through measures such as redevelopment and reconstruction permit approvals, the progress of preparatory works, public housing supply plans, and land-use regulations. If the analysis is further combined with the central government’s loan policies, tax regime, and interest-rate environment, actual prices and transaction flows can be determined. Ultimately, this dispute has gone beyond simple negative campaigning, taking on a strong tone of a contest for political leadership over responsibility for and solutions to instability in Seoul’s housing market.

As the election battle officially kicks off, this trend may shift toward competing over more specific policy content, such as supply performance and the speed of preparatory works, as well as strategies to stabilize the jeonse market. However, for voters, compared with criticizing the other side, the more crucial yardstick may be which side will actually expand supply and reduce the burden of housing costs—and by what means.