Lee Jae-myung's Approval Falls to 30%, Police Investigation Suspicions Raised Amid Real Estate and Inheritance Tax Criticism

He said the 30%-range figures had likely appeared a week or two earlier, and raised the possibility that polling firms had deliberately adjusted and announced figures in the low 40s. Lee stressed that this decline is not a mere statistical fluctuation but a serious situation reflecting a shift in public sentiment.

He expressed concern that if the president's grip on governing weakens, confusion could spread across state affairs.

He argued that such moves could discourage corporate activity and undermine economic vitality.

Lee Jun-woo cited business-succession inheritance tax policies in major overseas economies to argue that Korea's inheritance tax rate is excessively high. He explained that Germany recognizes 85% of business assets under certain conditions, and that Italy often recognizes 100% of business succession. He argued that compared with these overseas cases, Korea's inheritance tax policy runs counter to international trends and acts as a factor undermining corporate competitiveness.

He explained that for major shareholders, a 20% surcharge on the basic 50% rate brings the effective rate to 60%. Citing the case of Nexon founder Kim Jung-ju, he expressed concern that if large amounts of shares must be paid in kind to cover inheritance tax, management control of companies could be shaken and their competitiveness weakened. He argued that excessive inheritance tax hinders corporate growth and ultimately harms the national economy as well.

He claimed that if companies reduce factories or sell businesses to pay taxes, the decline in youth employment could deepen. He warned that if this continues, young people will find it even harder to get jobs, stressing the negative effects inheritance tax policy has on the economy as a whole.

He argued that reducing inheritance tax could activate the stock market, yet the president is pursuing policies in the opposite direction. He said this policy direction is like 'pressing the accelerator and the brake at the same time,' which would ultimately wreck the economy.

He acknowledged that business succession is sometimes abused as a loophole, but said 30 years is too long a period, spanning a generation during which the business environment can change drastically. He expressed concern that it is realistically difficult for a company to keep the same business for 30 years and that such a policy could discourage corporate activity.

He expressed surprise that the Lee government is trying to block jeonse loans, noting that even under the Moon Jae-in government, tenants and jeonse policy were left alone. He raised concern about the ripple effects such curbs would have on the housing market and predicted they would further deepen the decline in approval.

He criticized the situation as 'comedic,' in which the party, having taken power and pursuing tax increases to rein in real estate, sees its own Seoul constituency lawmakers taking a negative stance on those very policies.

He said he would secure housing lots and supply apartments even if it required amending laws. Lee Jun-woo said that while the president shows will to resolve Seoul's housing shortage, blaming Mayor Oh for its cause could be seen as shirking responsibility.

However, Lee Jun-woo rebutted the president's claim by citing a report from the LH Land & Housing Institute. According to that report, reconstruction produces a housing supply effect of 48.4%, indicating a very large increase. Critics argued that this contradicts the president's position and reflects a perception at odds with actual data.

He stressed that important state policy decisions are ultimately carried out after the president's approval, so responsibility for the results also lies with the president. He said passing one's own decisions onto others is an irresponsible act for a leader and amounts to deceiving the public.

Lee Jun-woo expressed doubts about the successive not-guilty verdicts in cases involving Lee Jae-myung. He said the verdict dates are oddly close together, leading him to wonder whether judges colluded in a way like 'if handled separately, coverage keeps getting heavier and more focused, so let's clear them all at once and end it quickly.' Such suspicions could lead to controversy over the independence of the judiciary. He viewed this pattern of rulings as somewhat unusual compared with ordinary judicial proceedings.

In other words, he speculated that the non-referral decision may have been a 'gift' meant to secure that authority. Lee stressed that the timing is so odd that such suspicions are inevitable.

He argued that such a dichotomous perception hinders a balanced view of investigative agencies and ultimately undermines trust in the justice system. He suggested that this party view could serve as a backdrop that amplifies suspicions about specific police investigative results.

Lee Jun-woo raised the possibility, based on these findings, that Korea's online public discourse is being contaminated by outside forces. The fact that non-Korean accounts are apparently deliberately stoking political division is being regarded as a serious problem. It is seen as a case showing the gravity of online opinion manipulation, raising concern that it could threaten the health of democracy. Such comment manipulation can distort public sentiment and deepen social division. Calls are therefore growing for urgent countermeasures.

He stressed that because foreign-account comment activity on major portals such as Naver and Daum Kakao has been found to amplify political conflict, society must be protected from such outside interference. He said flag marks would clarify commenters' nationality, prevent online opinion manipulation, and ensure that the views of Korean citizens can be discussed normally in a healthy public forum free of contamination. He emphasized that this is an important measure to guarantee the public's right to know and to protect the foundations of democracy.