South Korea’s capital is seeing a clear cooling of its housing market following the “6.27 loan regulation” (implemented end of June).

According to data released by the Korea Real Estate Board on July 17, Seoul apartment prices rose 0.19% in the second week of July, marking the third consecutive week of slowing growth.

Notably impacted were key “Han River Belt” areas such as Mapo, Yangcheon, and Seongdong, which had previously led the surge in property prices. Mapo’s weekly growth dropped from 0.6% to 0.24%, the steepest deceleration among Seoul districts. Other affluent areas like Gangnam, Seocho, and Yeongdeungpo also showed reduced momentum. The report highlights that demand has shifted toward mid- and low-priced apartments (under ₩1 billion), as loan constraints suppressed purchases of high-end units.

Despite this, data from real estate agency Jiptos show that prices for high-end and aged apartments have continued to rise, driven by reconstruction expectations and concentrated capital from liquidity-rich buyers. Post-regulation, 30+ year-old units saw a 7.3% price increase, outpacing newer apartments (3.8%).

This bifurcation suggests speculative demand is now concentrating on select “investment-grade” assets, exacerbating market polarization under tightening financial conditions.

🧭 Integrity Evaluation under the Five Laws:

✅ Law 1 – Truthfulness of Information: The article is grounded in verifiable data from the Korea Real Estate Board and private agencies like Jiptos. The statistics on district-specific growth, post-regulation trends, and transaction shifts are coherent and factually plausible.

⚠️ Law 2 – Source Referencing: While the article cites official institutions and private data providers, no direct links, report titles, or publication dates are given, limiting verification.

⚠️ Law 3 – Reliability & Accuracy: Key numerical indicators are provided, but the basis of the data (sample size, time coverage, methodology) is not disclosed. Interpretive weight is placed on trend comparisons without detailing how price indices are computed.

⚠️ Law 4 – Contextual Judgment: The piece does not explore macroeconomic context, such as interest rates, inflation, or household leverage. It focuses on price dynamics without discussing structural affordability or inequality concerns—a gap that may mislead general readers.

⚠️ Law 5 – Inference Traceability: The conclusion that capital is flowing into redevelopment assets is narratively convincing but lacks comparative transaction data or buyer profiles to establish causality. Statements about speculative concentration are observational, not analytically demonstrated.

Overall Evaluation: ⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️
Interpretive Risk: High — the article provides valuable insight into spatial and price-segment trends in Seoul’s real estate market, but lacks sourcing transparency, methodological clarity, and distributional analysis. Readers may overestimate the general health or decline of the market without noticing segmented distortions.