This article was published on Aug. 11, 2025, at 7:18 a.m. on the ChosunBiz MoneyMove site.
Homeplus, which is undergoing corporate rehabilitation procedures, is engaged in litigation to relieve itself of liability claims and restoration claims arising from the termination of lease agreements.
Currently, the liability claims and restoration claims following the termination of lease agreements are classified as contingent liabilities, totaling an enormous 1 trillion won. If these contingent liabilities become actual liabilities, they are expected to negatively impact the mergers and acquisitions (M&A) process.
According to investment banks (IB) and the legal community on the 11th, Samil Accounting Corporation, the investigation commissioner for Homeplus, estimated the amount of the liability claim and restoration claim arising from the termination of lease agreements at 965.1 billion won in a report submitted to the court. This is a type of contingent liability and may be an amount that Homeplus might have to pay to the lessor following the lease termination.
So far, the liability claims and restoration claims following the termination of lease agreements remain 'unconfirmed liabilities.' This is due to the possibility that the amounts may fluctuate depending on future negotiations or lawsuits. If this contingent liability is added to the current 2.7 trillion won debt that Homeplus holds, it will inevitably have a negative effect on the already challenging sales process.
Aware of this, Homeplus also explained in the teaser letter and the administrator's investigation report for the sale that 'the debtor intends to dispute the recovery claims based on damages and penalties according to the lease contract.' According to the Debtor Rehabilitation Act and court precedents, exercising the right to terminate the lease contract may allow for a reduction in penalties.
As of now, there have been a total of 38 confirmed judgments on the recovery claims investigation. This involves lawsuits initiated by Homeplus, which has denied the claims filed by creditors, requesting that they be recognized as recovery claims. Given that Homeplus is in negotiations to reduce its debt, if discussions fail, further lawsuits may increase in the future.
However, there is no room for reduction in restoration claims. Unlike liability claims classified as recovery claims, restoration claims are considered public interest claims. Public interest claims have a higher priority for repayment than recovery claims and collateral, and deferral or reduction of repayment is not permitted. If restoration claims are reflected in liabilities, this means that the amount the new acquirer of Homeplus has to shoulder increases.
Homeplus is involved in litigation concerning the restoration obligations with the lessor of its terminated lease at the Jamsil location. The Jamsil side is demanding restoration of facilities like the moving walk and escalators installed in the store for the operation of the mart, while Homeplus contends that it has no restoration obligations.
If the opinion from the Jamsil side is accepted, there is a high possibility that the restoration claims from other terminated leases will also be acknowledged.
A court official stated, 'The creditor from the Jamsil side has also received a decision from the court ordering Homeplus to pay unjust enrichment for rent and equivalent rent,' and noted that 'Homeplus has requested permission to file an objection with the Seoul Rehabilitation Court.'