Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

In a heated exchange that highlights the intensifying Seoul mayoral race, Democratic Party candidate Jung Wonoh has sharply criticized incumbent Mayor Oh Sehoon for what he describes as wasteful spending and misleading campaign tactics centered on real estate policies.

During a campaign committee meeting at his former campaign office on April 28, Jung accused Mayor Oh of deliberately stoking anxiety about real estate issues to gain political advantage. “Every election, raising the issue of taxes stirs up anxiety and intensifies real estate conflicts,” Jung stated, suggesting that Oh remains “trapped in the outdated framework of 2022.”

The criticism comes amid growing tensions between the two frontrunners as the June 3 local elections approach. Jung specifically called out Oh’s handling of the land transaction permit system in Seoul’s affluent Gangnam and Songpa districts, noting that the mayor had abruptly lifted restrictions last year only to reverse the decision just 35 days later.

“He is the one responsible for creating market turmoil by impulsively lifting the land transaction permit system in Seoul and then reversing it after just 35 days. It does not make sense for him to now shift the blame onto the government,” Jung said.

The Democratic candidate has been facing repeated questions from Mayor Oh regarding his position on the long-term capital gains tax exemption for homeowners. Jung reiterated his stance, saying, “The current rights of single-homeowners who actually reside in their property must be unconditionally protected.” He warned that continued “deliberate distortion of facts” on the issue would lead to citizens delivering a “stern judgment” at the polls.

In a pointed political attack, Jung accused Oh of failing to criticize what he called “the incompetence and recklessness of the Yoon Suk Yeol administration” while being quick to “pick a fight with the capable Lee Jae-myung administration.” This reference to national politics underscores how the Seoul mayoral race is being viewed as a referendum on both local and national leadership.

During an appearance on KBS’s current affairs program “Sasagungeon,” Jung expanded his critique, claiming that “the biggest problem with Oh’s administration is wasteful spending of tax money.” He specifically highlighted projects such as the Han River bus and the ‘Garden of Appreciation’ as examples of fiscal irresponsibility under Oh’s leadership.

On urban development issues, Jung identified Banpo Complex 1 and Apgujeong District 3—both connected to the controversial “cover park project”—as key redevelopment and reconstruction areas that require immediate attention. “I believe work should begin in those areas first. If the cover park project is delayed, the completion of the redevelopment could be postponed as well,” he explained.

Recent polling data suggests the race is tightening, with the gap narrowing between the two major parties in Seoul. Jung acknowledged this reality, saying, “Regardless of current or past approval ratings, Seoul elections have always been close contests. The outcome will be decided by a narrow margin.”

In framing the fundamental choice facing voters, Jung positioned himself as “a capable administrator who will ensure the safety and stability of citizens’ daily lives,” contrasting this with what he portrays as Oh’s wasteful and inconsistent governance style.

The candidate further emphasized his commitment to citizen engagement by livestreaming his campaign committee meeting on YouTube and staging a performance in which he received policy issues and pledges for all 25 districts of Seoul via parcel delivery from the co-chairs of his campaign committee.

As the June 3 election approaches, the contest for Seoul’s mayoral seat continues to intensify, with both candidates focusing on issues of fiscal responsibility, housing policy, and urban development in South Korea’s capital city.

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.

8 Comments

  1. Jennifer Williams on

    The real estate market and related policies can have significant impacts on people’s lives, so it’s understandable that this is a hot-button issue. I’d encourage voters to look past the partisan bickering and focus on the substance – what specific policies did each candidate support, and how would they have affected housing affordability and stability?

  2. Isabella Garcia on

    The accusations of false claims and market destabilization are serious. I hope the candidates and media can provide more objective analysis of the actual policy decisions and their effects. Voters deserve a clear, evidence-based understanding of the issues, not just partisan rhetoric.

    • William Martinez on

      Well said. Voters need factual information to make informed decisions, not just political point-scoring. I hope the candidates can move the discussion in a more constructive direction.

  3. I’m curious to learn more about the specifics of the real estate policies and how they impacted the market. It sounds like a complex issue with some political maneuvering involved. I hope the candidates can move past the mudslinging and focus on substantive policy discussions.

    • Isabella Thompson on

      Agreed, the political rhetoric seems to be overshadowing the actual policy details. Voters would benefit from a more objective analysis of the real estate situation and the merits of each candidate’s proposals.

  4. Michael Johnson on

    This seems like a politically-charged issue with accusations flying back and forth. I’ll try to analyze it objectively – it’s concerning if the mayor made false claims or abrupt policy changes that destabilized the real estate market. But we’d need more details to assess the validity of the criticisms.

    • Michael D. Martinez on

      You’re right, more context would be helpful to fully understand the situation. It’s important to look at both sides and avoid jumping to conclusions based on limited information.

  5. False claims and misleading tactics are concerning in any political race. However, I’m hesitant to take sides without seeing the full evidence. It’s important to scrutinize the candidates’ records and statements carefully before drawing conclusions. Hopefully the public can get a clearer picture as the election approaches.

Leave A Reply

A professional organisation dedicated to combating disinformation through cutting-edge research, advanced monitoring tools, and coordinated response strategies.

Company

Disinformation Commission LLC
30 N Gould ST STE R
Sheridan, WY 82801
USA

© 2026 Disinformation Commission LLC. All rights reserved.