On November 16, 2025, the political debate over South Korea’s housing market reached a fever pitch as the ruling party confirmed the rapid demolition and reconstruction of the 10.15 Seoul apartment complex, transforming it into a new hub for public rental housing. The move, completed within about a month, is being hailed by its architects as a bold policy for housing stability, but critics from the opposition are raising alarms about the broader consequences for ordinary citizens, especially young people and first-time homebuyers.
The 10.15 apartment complex, located in Seoul and Suwon, had been home to some 2,000 to 3,000 households until early October 2025. According to statements from the ruling party, after the demolition, approximately 90% of the area was secured for the construction of public rental housing. The government has emphasized that this project is not speculative in nature, but rather a clear and legitimate policy aimed at stabilizing the housing market and serving the public interest.
“The demolition and reconstruction are a legitimate and clear policy, not speculative,” a spokesperson for the ruling party stated, as reported by YTN. The party further stressed that the project would proceed swiftly and with minimal inconvenience to residents, aiming to complete the transformation within about a month from its official confirmation. The government also underscored that the policy would be implemented without a so-called ‘speculative ban,’ focusing instead on public benefit and housing stability.
Yet, this ambitious intervention has not escaped fierce criticism. The main opposition party, People Power Party (PPP), has been especially vocal, calling the government’s approach an outright failure that disregards the realities faced by ordinary citizens. Choi Bo-yoon, the PPP’s chief spokesperson, did not mince words in a statement on November 16: “The 10.15 real estate policy has, in just one month, turned Seoul and the metropolitan area into a market where only house prices are soaring while transactions have dried up. It has completely robbed ordinary people and young people of their dreams of homeownership and only deepened asset polarization. This is a massive policy failure.”
Choi pointed to the dramatic drop in apartment transactions as evidence of the policy’s chilling effect. “Until early October, the number of apartment transactions in Seoul exceeded 2,000 to 3,000 per month. Since the policy announcement, the number has plummeted by nearly 90%,” Choi explained, citing data that has been widely circulated in local media including NEWSIS and YTN.
The opposition’s critique runs deeper than just numbers. They argue that the government’s ‘triple regulation’—a combination of stringent lending restrictions and expanded regulatory zones—has effectively shut down the housing market. “The market is, in effect, shut down,” Choi said. “Applying uniform regulations regardless of local circumstances is clear administrative violence.” The opposition contends that areas such as Nowon, Dobong, and Gangbuk—collectively known as ‘Nodogang’—have been subjected to the same harsh regulations as the affluent Gangnam district, sparking widespread resentment over what they describe as reverse discrimination.
One of the most controversial elements of the policy has been the expansion of the land transaction permit system. The government argues that this measure is necessary to curb speculative ‘gap investment,’ but the opposition insists it has backfired. “Expanding the land transaction permit system, under the pretext of preventing speculation, has effectively kicked away the housing ladder for real demanders,” Choi said. “Now, even moving house for reasons like marriage, job changes, or children’s education requires administrative approval. This is the greatest violence real home seekers feel.”
Song Eon-seok, the PPP’s floor leader, echoed these sentiments on social media, describing the government’s approach as “kicking away the ladder, or worse, mixing up the ladder so those on it fall off the cliff.” Song argued that the policy has accelerated real estate polarization, with wealthy cash buyers snapping up high-priced apartments along the Han River while ordinary people are pushed into the rental market or forced to become ‘monthly rent refugees.’ He also criticized the government for allegedly cherry-picking statistics, excluding September data and relying on figures from June to August, thereby unfairly targeting certain districts in Seoul and Gyeonggi Province for regulatory crackdowns.
“The government must immediately withdraw the flawed 10.15 policy, which denies market principles and infringes upon basic rights, and instead present bold and effective supply measures,” Song urged, as quoted by YTN.
The opposition’s concerns are not limited to Seoul. They point to the so-called ‘balloon effect’—where house prices in non-regulated areas such as Hwaseong, Guri, and Namyangju have risen sharply as buyers flee the regulated zones. “The balloon effect is now clearly visible in non-regulated areas,” Choi noted, emphasizing that what is needed is not more regulation, but a supply-side shift that gives real buyers room to breathe.
Meanwhile, the ruling party insists that the demolition and reconstruction of the 10.15 complex are necessary measures to stabilize the housing market and prevent speculation. They maintain that the project is being carried out with public interest at heart, and that the rapid timeline will minimize disruption for former residents. “The demolition and reconstruction are a legitimate and clear policy, not speculative,” the ruling party reiterated, according to NEWSIS and YTN. They add that the focus is on ensuring housing stability and that the policy is designed to benefit the broader public, not just a select few.
Yet, as the dust settles on the demolished apartment blocks and new public rental units begin to rise, the political and social debate shows no sign of abating. The opposition continues to call for a fundamental rethinking of government housing policy, warning that repeated regulatory cycles—seen under previous administrations as well—have failed to deliver genuine solutions. “Is this government incapable of learning from past policy failures?” asked a PPP spokesperson, referencing the repeated interventions under previous presidents Roh Moo-hyun and Moon Jae-in.
For now, the future of South Korea’s housing market hangs in the balance. With the government doubling down on rapid public housing construction and the opposition demanding a pivot towards deregulation and increased supply, millions of ordinary citizens—especially young people and first-time buyers—are left wondering when, or if, they will be able to climb the housing ladder.
