Fake real estate listings have long plagued South Korea. Each time the issue flares up, the government and local authorities pledge a crackdown, but conditions in the market change little. The reason is straightforward: even when violators are caught, they can ride out a brief penalty, and workarounds remain available.
An April investigation by Aju News’ reporting team, “Balpum,” found widespread deception. After checking 30 brokerage offices across Seoul, the team could view the advertised properties in person at only nine. In effect, seven out of 10 young people are being lured by bait listings before they even secure housing.
A month after the report, bait listings still dominate. Brokers routinely say, “It was just rented,” or “It’s risky because there’s a lot of debt,” then steer customers into closed KakaoTalk open-chat rooms.
Even firms named in the reporting have carried on. So-called “factory-style” real estate offices around Gwanak-gu that were identified by name are still operating, seemingly unfazed by administrative penalties. Their tactics are calculated: just before a suspension for false listings, they move more than a dozen assistant agents at once to another office set up under a different name. It is a shell-game approach — swapping signs and changing the registered representative — often described as “zombie” operations or “cell division.”
Cases tracked by the team highlight how weak on-the-ground oversight can be. Because businesses can change names faster than penalties are imposed, enforcement often amounts to action after the fact.
Light penalties and loose supervision also play a role. Under the Licensed Real Estate Agents Act, the maximum fine for false listing ads is 5 million won. For operators who can draw in hundreds of customers, that amount is treated less as a deterrent than as a cost of doing business.
Local governments face clear limits as well. The system is largely complaint-driven, and enforcement staffing is thin. With one official at a district office responsible for overseeing hundreds of brokerage offices, meaningful follow-up investigations are nearly impossible. While authorities promise to “take action,” operators are already preparing the next corporate entity to use as cover.
The market learns to game the system. When posting false listings brings no immediate hit — and getting caught can be sidestepped by changing form — bait-and-switch sales become less an exception than a new norm. Even diligent agents say they are pushed into the cycle because “if you don’t post fake listings, you can’t even get customers to look.”
The cost falls most heavily on those with the least leverage: young people and first-time workers searching for affordable housing. For them, a fake listing is not merely a wasted trip. It is deception that uses the right to housing as leverage and erodes trust from the outset.
To curb false listings, authorities need more than periodic crackdowns; they need sustained management. That includes tracking repeat offenders and closely monitoring changes in business names and locations. Promising enforcement is easy. Keeping that promise requires persistent execution.
That false listings still circulate widely is an admission that administrative action is not keeping pace with operators’ evasions. Someone, even now, is walking to a room that exists only in photos. The government and local authorities need to provide practical answers that stop those wasted steps.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.