- Recognizing reasonable non-resident single-home owners? What is the reasonable standard?
- Concerns of a patchwork policy; lift regulations instead of branding them as speculators
- Aug. 3 tax reform plan as a starting point for discussion? It undermines trust in policy
- Delegating approval authority for small-scale housing? Wondering why the threshold is 500 units
- Reasons to oppose Yongsan? Must balance the entire city... Concerns over reckless development
- Developing only damaged areas in Yongsan Park? It will leave the law as a mere shell
- May hold off without tabling the Yongsan development special act
- Will the Democratic Party overreach with the Yongsan Special Act? It lacks persuasiveness
- Direct election of local chapter heads by party members: The "why" fails to convince
- Difficult to achieve the effects Jang Dong-hyeok anticipates
- "Fighting" local chapter heads? I fought against presidential contenders
- Many lawmakers skipping the workshop? I will attend
■ Broadcast: SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show (FM 103.5 MHz 7:00 – 9:00)
■ Date: Tuesday, August 25, 2026
■ Host: Attorney Kim Tae-hyun
■ Guest: People Power Party Lawmaker Yu Eui-dong (Chairman of the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee)
[Kim Tae-hyun] Real estate issues are heating up. The government and the ruling party have reached a consensus on the need to supplement the tax reform plan, but how does the opposition view it? We speak with Lawmaker Yu Eui-dong of the People Power Party, who chairs the National Assembly's Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee. Hello, Lawmaker.
[Yu Eui-dong] Hello. Good to be here.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Good to see you.
[Yu Eui-dong] It has been a while.
[Kim Tae-hyun] It really has been a long time since we met in person in the studio. We have conducted phone interviews several times before. As the chair of the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee, the most critical topic for you must be real estate issues.
[Yu Eui-dong] That is right.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Looking at reports from yesterday, articles are coming out saying that "the ruling party and government agreed to expand the scope of recognizing actual residence for non-resident single-home owners" and "the government is reviewing reverting the deduction back to the current pre-reform amount of 1.2 billion won." In any case, they are rolling things back somewhat to how they used to be. Do you think they are heading in the right direction?
[Yu Eui-dong] Minister of Economy and Finance Gu Yun-cheol spoke at the National Assembly yesterday to the effect that the government would decisively shift to recognizing reasonable non-residents as actual residents.
[Kim Tae-hyun] "Reasonable non-residents."
[Yu Eui-dong] Yes. Who decides the standard of what is "reasonable," and who sets the criteria for what is recognized and what is not? It feels excessively patronizing, like saying "I will grant you recognition." I believe endless controversy will arise during this process of granting exceptions.
[Kim Tae-hyun] With the public asking, "What about me? Why not me?" and so on.
[Yu Eui-dong] Exactly. For instance, if a household with a middle school student is recognized, what about elementary school students? What about upper-grade elementary students? Lower-grade elementary students? Kindergarteners? The controversy will continue to spread like that. As for exceptions in the law, you would know better as someone with a legal background, but the cleanest laws are those without exceptions. In that sense, I think this will turn completely into a patchwork, and they have already fallen into a quagmire.
[Kim Tae-hyun] I see.
[Yu Eui-dong] Also, some say, "Haven't they taken the right direction since they stepped back significantly on tax reform?" Then why on earth was the August 3 measure created in the first place? What was the objective of that August 3 measure?
[Kim Tae-hyun] Stabilizing housing prices.
[Yu Eui-dong] Was it stabilizing housing prices, or was it a measure for jeonse and monthly rentals? It is impossible to tell. If they are now saying they will revert to the original state after throwing the public into confusion, I really do not know if that can be called good policy. What I would like to ask of the Lee Jae-myung administration and the Democratic Party is this: unless they quickly break free from the dogma that non-resident single-home owners are speculators and that only actual residency can solve all real estate problems, we will not be able to solve the real estate challenges we face today.
[Kim Tae-hyun] So rather than granting reasonable exceptions, are you saying that regulations on non-resident single-home owners should simply be completely lifted? Plain and simple.
[Yu Eui-dong] Exactly. Because even though they say taxes have returned to their original state, the most representative residency policy is the land transaction permit system. The land transaction permit zone, which was originally applied to the three Gangnam districts, was expanded to all of Seoul, and as prices in neighboring areas rose due to the balloon effect, it was expanded further to places like Guri and Dongtan. But have apartment prices stabilized in those surrounding areas?
[Kim Tae-hyun] They seem to be fluctuating.
[Yu Eui-dong] People describe it as leveling up now. Prices are rising as much as borrowing limits allow, and the jeonse and monthly rent issues are becoming severe. If actual residency is enforced for all homes in Seoul, more than 50% of residents in Seoul alone are currently tenants. Where will they go? They will be pushed out to neighboring areas like Gyeonggi and Incheon.
[Kim Tae-hyun] They would leave.
[Yu Eui-dong] Then, in a chain reaction, jeonse and monthly rental prices in Gyeonggi and Incheon will rise as well. That is why framing non-resident single-home owners as speculative forces—
[Kim Tae-hyun] You want to break that dogma itself?
[Yu Eui-dong] Yes.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Presidential Chief of Staff Kang Hoon-sik said, "The previously announced tax reform plan was not a unilateral declaration of what we will do, but a starting point to listen to public opinion." How did you view those remarks?
[Yu Eui-dong] I do not want to use harsh words on a morning broadcast. If you want to call it a starting point, on August 3 when the policy was announced, you should have said, "This is a starting point. This is meant to gauge public sentiment and listen to public opinion; this is not a finalized policy, but a process to hear your thoughts." Instead, how did they frame it? The government called it a tax reform for fair taxation. The president even used the term "tax normalization" the next day. If they are now going back to how it was before, doesn't that mean they are moving toward an abnormal state?
[Kim Tae-hyun] Indeed. Because back then, they called it normalization.
[Yu Eui-dong] That is why I believe the greatest harm caused by the August 3 incident—the August 3 measure—was bringing policy credibility down to rock bottom.
[Kim Tae-hyun] You mean the process of announcing it, facing problems, and then modifying it.
[Yu Eui-dong] Constantly. For example, remarks were made like, "Stabilizing apartment prices in Seoul is easier than organizing mountain stream valleys," and "We will not rein in apartment prices with taxes and loans." What else was there? In any case, they showed immense confidence in these matters, but now they are heading in the exact opposite direction. Naturally, public suspicion regarding policy credibility continues to grow. There should be an explanation for why this policy was pursued and why the August 3 measure was taken, yet the public cannot understand why. It makes no sense.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Right.
[Yu Eui-dong] Then policy credibility cannot be established. As I said earlier, unless they quickly escape this dogma regarding actual residence, resolving this issue will be difficult. That is my view.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Looking at the party-government consultation two days ago, authority over redevelopment and reconstruction of housing under 500 units will be transferred to heads of basic local governments. In the case of Seoul, that means authority held by Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon will be distributed to district chiefs. How do you view this? Mayor Oh strongly objected to it.
[Yu Eui-dong] I also have a great deal to say about this, but since time is limited today, setting aside other complex legal procedures, the Seoul Metropolitan Government has already explained it sufficiently. Out of nine stages, district chiefs already hold authority over seven. Then why 500 units?
[Kim Tae-hyun] The standard is vague?
[Yu Eui-dong] If the threshold is 500 units, they must explain why it is 500 units. And they need to explain how much faster it will become. They claim it will become innovatively fast, but Seoul City explains that the two stages it handles take about four months in total. When announcing this policy, if they argue it takes much longer than four months and point out specific flaws in how Seoul City handled it, they should provide evidence showing why delegating the 500-unit threshold to municipal and district heads is justified. Doing so without evidence and vaguely labeling it an "innovative measure" is one issue.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Yes.
[Yu Eui-dong] Normally, this designation authority is given to basic local government mayors and county governors. However, it is not given to district chiefs. The reason it is not given to district chiefs in Seoul and metropolitan cities is that Seoul and metropolitan cities have relatively smaller land areas compared to other provinces. Their density is very high. Therefore, Seoul City coordinates the design in terms of balanced development to ensure the entire city maintains overall harmony. That is why it was not given to district chiefs. If this authority is handed over to district chiefs, what problem will arise? Going forward, projects will be partitioned into 500-unit increments. That will lead to reckless, unplanned development. For example, if a project is approved in Eunpyeong District but rejected in Seodaemun District, people across the street will ask, "What is the standard?" They will ask what criteria are being used to coordinate Seoul as a whole.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Understood. Lastly, let us look at one more real estate issue: Yongsan Park. Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Kim Yoon-deok stated that they are not developing the entire area, but merely redeveloping parts of damaged sites previously used as U.S. military bases, and asked why there is such opposition. Chairman, how do you view this Yongsan Park issue?
[Yu Eui-dong] I believe that phrasing is flawed. Saying, "It is damaged land, it has already been damaged, so what is wrong with building apartments here?" is problematic. This is not damaged land. It was originally a military base. The plan is to transform that military base into a park. It is not about building apartments because parts of what used to be a park or forest were damaged. It was originally a military base, and under former President Roh Moo-hyun, this law was enacted with the vision that it holds historical symbolism and that having a large park functioning like Central Park in Seoul would be beneficial.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Yes.
[Yu Eui-dong] Article 4, Paragraph 2 of this act outlines the state's responsibilities. It specifies that the state shall, in principle, develop the entire main site into Yongsan Park, and shall not change the use of the main site for purposes other than a park or dispose of it through sale or other means. That is the state's duty.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Yes.
[Yu Eui-dong] If they try to alter and develop something on the main site, the law itself is rendered a hollow shell at that very moment.
[Kim Tae-hyun] They say they will amend this law. That falls under the jurisdiction of the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee, right?
[Yu Eui-dong] That is correct.
[Kim Tae-hyun] You are the committee chairman.
[Yu Eui-dong] Yes.
[Kim Tae-hyun] If this bill comes up, what will you do? In terms of numbers, there are many Democratic Party lawmakers on the committee.
[Yu Eui-dong] If it is introduced, the chairman's role is to ensure the committee operates smoothly and normally, so I will remain faithful to my duties. However, on a personal level, I certainly have my own views on this bill. I plan to fully utilize all the authority available to me as chairman.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Does that mean you might hold out without tabling it?
[Yu Eui-dong] If that is a viable option, I will have to do so. But in my view, I do not think the Democratic Party will push unreasonably hard on this issue.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Is that so?
[Yu Eui-dong] In terms of justification, logic, and all other aspects, the Democratic Party's current arguments are not particularly persuasive.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Have you been having good dialogue on this issue with ruling party committee members?
[Yu Eui-dong] We have not yet discussed this issue in depth within the committee.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Understood. Lawmaker, let us turn to internal party matters, even if it may be reluctant ground. At the general meeting of lawmakers, reports indicated that as many as 40 lawmakers opposed the re-election of local chapter heads. You oppose it as well, correct?
[Yu Eui-dong] That is right.
[Kim Tae-hyun] What is the primary reason for your opposition?
[Yu Eui-dong] As mentioned earlier, whenever a system is changed or a political action is taken, the "why" must be explained. I do not see the reason for changing this system—the "why." Only when you understand the "why" can you figure out "how" and proceed to the next steps. It seems the "why" has not been sufficiently persuasive.
[Kim Tae-hyun] If you were to guess, what might it be? The "why." To oust people they dislike and plant their own loyalists?
[Yu Eui-dong] In practice, achieving that is difficult. Unlike European parties, where party members join voluntarily because parties are small under a multi-party system and members seek specific political goals, under our two-party system, these are mass parties. Outcomes depend on how the public is mobilized. Because that mobilization is usually carried out by existing local chapter heads and sitting lawmakers, it will be hard to achieve the anticipated effects, despite such speculation.
[Kim Tae-hyun] So even if they go through with it, ousting undesirable figures and installing new ones will not really work out?
[Yu Eui-dong] Realistically, that is rather difficult.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Representative Jang talks about "fighting" local chapter heads. What do you think is meant by "fighting"?
[Yu Eui-dong] Well, that question also lingers in my mind like a recurring topic.
[Kim Tae-hyun] He mentioned nominating fighters during the general election, speaking as if he expects to serve consecutive terms.
[Yu Eui-dong] In my case, I fought hard not long ago.
[Kim Tae-hyun] That is true. Against two individuals.
[Yu Eui-dong] Recently, I could barely check my text messages because so many poured in. My acquaintances and local constituents send texts with various opinions and civil complaints. So many messages flood in that I miss them and often respond two or three days later. Many of those messages ask, "Why aren't you fighting?" But I fought fiercely not long ago, and I even fought against a leading presidential contender. How much more am I supposed to fight? I hold these personal thoughts, but it is difficult to answer each person individually. I am also still pondering what the definition of "fighting" truly is.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Understood. Will you attend the party workshop?
[Yu Eui-dong] Of course I should go.
[Kim Tae-hyun] There was a report this morning that some lawmakers might not attend.
[Yu Eui-dong] Why is that?
[Kim Tae-hyun] I do not know either. Whether it is because of Representative Jang or former President Park Geun-hye, there are reports that some lawmakers will skip the workshop.
[Yu Eui-dong] Those issues aside, the workshop is a place where we discuss operational plans ahead of the regular National Assembly session and hold subcommittee discussions by standing committee. Especially in my position as a standing committee chairman, it would be difficult for me not to attend.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Understood. Do you view former President Park Geun-hye's attendance positively?
[Yu Eui-dong] That decision rests with the floor leader who extended the invitation, and whether to attend is up to former President Park Geun-hye herself.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Since reports say she will attend.
[Yu Eui-dong] If so, I respect that as it is.
[Kim Tae-hyun] Understood. We will wrap up here. That was Lawmaker Yu Eui-dong of the People Power Party, who chairs the Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee. Thank you.
[Yu Eui-dong] Thank you.
The copyright of this interview material belongs to SBS Radio.
When publishing the full text or quoting this interview in reporting,
please specify the channel name and the exact program name as shown below.
[SBS Kim Tae-hyun's Political Show]
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.