Seoul mortgage quote: 6.77% fixed for 30 years on a ₩765,900,000 purchase

[bikesAndEcho]

I’m comparing mortgage offers for a two-bedroom property in Seoul priced around ₩765,900,000. One quote is 6.77%, described as fixed for 30 years. The advertised rate initially looked better, but arrangement fees and the loan-to-value tier changed the picture.

Which figure is most useful for comparing lenders here: APR, interest over the period I realistically expect to keep the loan, or total cash cost including fees? I’m also checking early-repayment terms and whether the mortgage is genuinely portable.

 

[selma_young]

Compare total cash outlay over your likely holding period, not automatically over 30 years. Include upfront fees, monthly payments and any cost triggered if you repay or refinance at the end of that period. APR can help with an initial comparison, but only if both lenders calculate and disclose it on the same basis.

 

[bikesAndBirch]

What loan amount are they actually offering? The purchase price alone is not enough because the loan-to-value tier affects both the rate and how much interest you pay. I’d ask each lender for illustrations using the same deposit, loan amount and repayment term. Otherwise a lower-rate quote can look cheaper simply because it assumes you borrow less.

 

[theo_cedar]

I’d first clarify what “fixed for 30 years” means in the paperwork. Is the rate guaranteed for the entire 30-year repayment term, or is 30 years only the amortisation schedule with a rate reset earlier? That distinction matters more than portability if there is any reset risk.

 

[still_pebble]

I slightly disagree that expected holding-period cost should dominate. It is useful, but it can reward an offer that only looks good because you assume an easy refinance later. Run at least two cases: keeping the mortgage for your expected period and keeping it substantially longer. Also test whether the monthly payment remains comfortable without relying on future rate cuts or income growth.

 

[knitsAndAtlas]

For a clean comparison, make a small table with one column per lender: amount borrowed, 6.77% or alternative rate, monthly payment, upfront arrangement fees, other compulsory charges, balance remaining at your chosen comparison date, and early-repayment cost at that date. Put portability in a separate notes column because it may be conditional rather than a simple monetary benefit.

 

[cedar.first]

Also ask what happens to any arrangement fee if the purchase does not complete, and get the early-repayment schedule rather than a yes/no answer. Portability needs detail too: whether it depends on a fresh affordability assessment, the next property’s loan-to-value, or lender approval at that time. Those points are jurisdiction- and contract-specific, so the written offer matters more than the headline description.