Mortgage quote in South Korea: 6.06% fixed for 15 years (2 bed)

R

reviewTheHarbor

Buyer
One illustration offers the comfort of a 6.06% fixed rate for 15 years, while another looks cheaper at first glance but becomes less appealing once its fees and loan-to-value band are applied. Neither feels easy to compare because I’m not convinced the lenders have used the same assumptions.

The purchase is a two-bed in Seoul at roughly ₩862,500,000. Should I build the comparison around APR, cash paid over the years I expect to hold the loan, or interest plus all upfront and financed charges? I also need to account for early repayment and portability rather than choosing on rate alone.

I’m checking whether the 15 years refers to the whole repayment term or only the fixed-rate period. What other inputs need to be made identical before the figures mean anything?
 
The remaining balance at the comparison date is the detail that would change my view most. For example, two offers can produce similar payments for five years while leaving very different amounts still owed.

I would first put both illustrations on the same loan amount, repayment method, term and fee treatment. Then choose a realistic exit date and add the payments, charges and any repayment penalty up to that point, alongside the balance still outstanding. APR can flag an odd result, but it should not override that side-by-side calculation.
 
Does “fixed for 15 years” also mean the mortgage is fully repaid after 15 years, or does the rate reset while a balance remains? That missing fact could change the comparison substantially. I’d also ask whether each arrangement fee is paid upfront or added to the loan, because financing the fee changes both the balance and interest.
 
I wouldn’t automatically use the full 15 years as the comparison period. If there is any realistic chance of selling or refinancing earlier, run the numbers at perhaps several possible exit dates and include any early-repayment cost plus the outstanding principal. Portability deserves separate treatment too: confirm what conditions apply rather than assigning it a cash value simply because the illustration says it is available.
 
That’s fair, although I’d be cautious about building the decision around an assumed refinance. A future replacement loan may not be attractive or affordable. If the debt continues beyond the fixed period, I would stress-test the later monthly payment at higher rates as well as checking whether today’s 6.06% payment is comfortable.
 
A simple spreadsheet should settle most of this. Give both lenders the same loan amount and intended term, then list: upfront cash, monthly payments, fees added to the balance, total payments by each possible exit date, outstanding balance, and early-repayment charges. Keep portability as a written-terms question. If the results still differ unexpectedly, ask each lender to identify the exact loan-to-value tier and assumptions used in its illustration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top