Seoul's apartment premium over South Korea's provinces widens to fivefold

The ratio understates the split. In 2006 a square meter of Seoul apartment cost 3.59 million won against 1.03 million in the non-capital provinces, a gap of 2.56 million won ^[1][1]. By 2025 the gap was 11.17 million won. In won terms that is about 4.4 times wider, while the ratio only went from about 3.5 to about 5 ^[2][1].

The report, titled "The Need for Differentiated Policy Responses Reflecting Regional Housing Market Characteristics," also shows that the country has already been through a steep national fall in new supply ^[18]. New private apartment presales fell 67.8% nationwide, from 360,569 units in 2015 to 116,213 in 2025 ^[7]. The five largest metropolitan cities and Sejong saw their share of new presales fall from 28.7% in 2014 to 16.4% ^[9]. Their unsold rate in 2025 was still 5.7 times its 2021 level ^[12].

In the non-capital provinces, less new supply cannot clear the stock because more than half of it is finished: 52.1% of unsold homes there are completed ^[15]. Seoul Economic Daily's account of the report calls that a structural problem that adjusting new supply alone cannot resolve ^[15]. Vacancy in those provinces reached 12.2% in 2024, against 3.2% in Seoul ^[16].

Seoul is at the other end. Its 2025 new private presales were about 3.4% of the national total ^[3]. Its presale prices rose about 44% between January 2025 and May 2026, to 19.22 million won per square meter ^[6]. The provinces' unsold rate is about 13.8 times Seoul's ^[4].

Splitting the country in two still leaves too much variation inside each half. On median prices, the gap between Gyeonggi Province's dearest and cheapest areas is about 11.6 times. That is more than double the Seoul-provinces ratio, though the comparison is rough because that ratio uses averages ^[2][2]. "Beyond the broad distinction between the capital region and the rest of the country, price gaps between metropolitan and rural areas are clear even within the same city or province," the institute said ^[5].

For the capital region, the institute recommends new supply matched to demand ^[17]. Builders have already moved there. Gyeonggi and Incheon took 53.2% of new presales in 2025, up from 28.8% in 2014 ^[9]. Yet 76.1% of their unsold homes are still unfinished, which the report reads as a mismatch between the pipeline and actual demand ^[14]. The published account ends before the institute's recommendation for the provinces ^[17].

Two developments would weaken the case for city-by-city rules. The first is a cyclical glut. The report's own wording is only that provincial markets may be moving beyond a temporary glut into long-run accumulation ^[13]. Unsold stock clearing without local programs would settle that the other way. The second concerns Seoul. If prices there keep rising after supply recovers, the part that fails is the institute's supply prescription for the capital.

In my view the evidence supports at least three policy zones: Seoul, Gyeonggi and Incheon, and the provinces. Each has a different unsold problem: almost none in Seoul, an unfinished pipeline in Gyeonggi and Incheon, and finished homes in the provinces ^[11][14][15]. The Gyeonggi spread argues for going down to counties, at the cost of more boundaries for builders and buyers to work around. The thesis fails if completed homes fall below half of provincial unsold stock and the provincial unsold rate falls back toward 2021 levels with no local intervention ^[15][12].