Debate is intensifying over whether there was intentional "statistical omission" at the time of the Oct. 15 real estate measures, which designated all of Seoul and 12 locations in Gyeonggi Province as regulated areas and land transaction permit zones. Political circles claim there was an attempt to manipulate the use of past statistics to expand regulated areas, while the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) says it used statistics lawfully. As a result of the controversy, MOLIT faces the prospect of an administrative lawsuit, and Minister Kim Yun-duk has been reported to police.
Lee Jong-bae, a Seoul Metropolitan Council member from the People Power Party, on the 9th reported the Minister to the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency on charges including drafting false official documents and abuse of authority, saying, "Please investigate whether the omission was intentional." Lee said, "If the September statistics had been reflected, the five districts of Dobong, Eunpyeong, Jungnang, Gangbuk, and Geumcheon likely would have been excluded from regulated areas," and argued, "There is strong suspicion that MOLIT removed unfavorable data."
Earlier, Reform Party floor leader Cheon Ha-ram also said, "After the government had already decided to designate all of Seoul as a regulated area, it intentionally excluded the September statistics that did not fit the conclusion," signaling an administrative lawsuit.
The issue at the center of controversy in the Oct. 15 measures is the interpretation of the "previous three months of statistics." Under the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act, the requirement for designating an area subject to adjustment is that "the dwelling price growth rate for the previous three months exceeds 1.3 times the consumer price inflation rate." To designate a speculative overheat district, the dwelling price growth rate for the previous three months must exceed 1.5 times the consumer price inflation rate. MOLIT selected regulated areas by applying the June–August statistics on the grounds that the September statistics had not yet been released.
The opposition camp argues that MOLIT intentionally excluded the latest statistics even though it received the September data in advance on the 13th of last month, prior to the Oct. 15 announcement. They point out that the government selectively applied relevant statistics in order to expand regulated areas to prevent a balloon effect. According to the office of People Power Party lawmaker Kim Eun-hye, if MOLIT applied the September statistics, 10 locations—including Jungnang, Gangbuk, Dobong, Eunpyeong, and Geumcheon districts in Seoul and Uiwang, Suwon Jangan, and Suwon Paldal in Gyeonggi—would not meet the criteria for speculative overheat districts.
MOLIT counters that the designation of regulated areas was carried out through lawful procedures. In an explanatory release, MOLIT said, "Under the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act, if there are no statistics for the relevant period when determining whether the criteria for designating regulated areas are met, it is stipulated to use statistics for the closest month or year," adding, "Accordingly, the Residential Policy Deliberation Committee lawfully designated the areas based on the June–August statistics."
MOLIT further explained, "Even if MOLIT receives statistics that have been completed in accordance with the Statistics Act, providing or leaking them before publication is strictly prohibited, so the September dwelling price statistics could not be provided to the Residential Policy Deliberation Committee or used in deliberations until the 15th, when they were published," adding, "The allegation that we intentionally excluded the latest statistics and distorted the figures is not true."