[EAI Presidential Election Panel Survey] ⑩ Real Estate Policy and Candidate Morality: What was the Impact of Issues in the 2022 Presidential Election?

The 2022 presidential election saw many new phenomena not observed in previous elections. Most notably, the candidates of the two major parties were both political outsiders. Lee Jae-myung, the candidate for the ruling Democratic Party, served as mayor of Seongnam City and governor of Gyeonggi Province, but had no central political experience and no experience as a member of the National Assembly. Yoon Suk-yeol, the candidate for the opposition People Power Party, had experience as prosecutor general but no political background whatsoever. For these reasons, neither candidate had the loyal supporters built up over a long period like previous candidates. This is different from Kim Young-sam and Kim Dae-jung, who were based on regionalism, Roh Moo-hyun, who received fervent support from the so-called 386 generation, Park Geun-hye, who received support from the Park Chung-hee generation, and Moon Jae-in, who was based on pro-Roh supporters.

As a result, the approval ratings of both candidates showed signs of easy fluctuation depending on the situation. That is, during the election campaign period, the approval ratings of these two candidates were more significantly influenced by external factors such as election issues. In that regard, this report will examine the impact of issues in the 2022 presidential election.

What issues had the greatest impact on voting decisions? As shown in [Table 1], among the various issues raised during the election campaign, the one that had the greatest impact was the 'failure of the Moon Jae-in administration's real estate policy.' 31.1% of respondents cited real estate issues as their first priority, and the combined percentage of first and second priority responses was also the highest at 38.9%. This indicates that the real estate issue influenced nearly 40% of voters.

The next most influential issues were those related to the candidates' morality. Based on first-priority responses, 'Yoon Suk-yeol's wife's false resume and stock manipulation controversy' ranked second highest at 14.2%, and the combined percentage of first and second priority responses was also the second highest at 26.4%. Based on the sum of first and second priorities, the third was the Daejang-dong development scandal; while the first priority was 9.8%, the second priority response was 14.4%, totaling 24.2%. Following the real estate issues, issues related to negative campaigning against both candidates had an impact. However, considering the response rate for Lee Jae-myung's wife's corporate card misuse controversy (10.1%) and the response rate for Lee Jae-myung's own morality issues such as cursing his sister-in-law (21.2%), the morality controversies involving Lee Jae-myung and his family amount to 55.5%. Furthermore, adding the response rate for the controversy surrounding Yoon Suk-yeol's use of shamanism, indicated by drawing a 'King' (王) character on his palm during a TV debate (15.3%), the percentage of morality controversies concerning Yoon Suk-yeol increases to 41.7%.

Ultimately, morality controversies surrounding both candidates had a significant impact on the voting decision process. In particular, as the combined percentages show, morality issues worked more unfavorably for Lee Jae-myung. As shown in [Table 2], among Lee Jae-myung voters, only 1.4% responded that they voted based on the candidate's morality, a stark contrast to Yoon Suk-yeol's 20.2%. Another interesting point from [Table 2] is that for Lee Jae-myung, only 5.9% responded that they voted based on their party affiliation, while 63.1% highly valued personal factors such as the candidate's ability and experience. In contrast, among Yoon Suk-yeol voters, the response rate for voting based on party affiliation was relatively high at 15.2%.

In other words, the real estate issue and issues related to negative campaigning against each candidate had a significant impact during the election. This seems to be related to the fact that during the election campaign, detailed, tailored pledges were presented without the presentation of grand narratives outlining the direction of state administration after taking office. The unification of Yoon Suk-yeol and Ahn Cheol-soo candidates had a lower combined response rate of 18.6% for first and second priorities compared to the real estate or morality controversy issues.

Interestingly, unlike in the past, North Korean issues had virtually no impact. Although North Korea launched missiles multiple times before the election day, the effect of 'North Wind' was virtually nonexistent. The first-priority response to North Korean provocations was only 0.4%, and the combined first and second priorities were only 2.3%. Instead, the combined response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine was 3.9%, which was higher than that for North Korea's missile launches.

[Table 1] Issues Affecting Voting Decisions

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

[Table 2] Reasons for Voting for a Candidate x Voted Candidate

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

However, the impact of issues may vary by region. While the surge in apartment prices was centered in Seoul and the surrounding metropolitan area, the response rate to the Moon Jae-in administration's failed real estate policies was highest in the Chungcheong region, followed by Seoul.[1]. As shown in [Table 3], except for the Jeolla region, which showed a response rate of 16.5%, most regions showed response rates of 30% or higher. This indicates that the failure of real estate policies was a significant election issue that resonated nationwide. In contrast, other issues showed clear regional variations. The negative issues concerning Lee Jae-myung were highest in the Daegu and Gyeongbuk regions and lowest in the Jeolla region, while the negative issues concerning Yoon Suk-yeol showed the opposite pattern. This suggests that the effects of negative campaigning influenced voters differently based on their candidate preferences. The effect of the Yoon Suk-yeol-Ahn Cheol-soo unification also appeared strongest in the Jeolla region. It is plausible that the sense of crisis that the unification of the two candidates could disadvantage Lee Jae-myung influenced the voting choices of Jeolla region voters.

[Table 3] Major Issues Influencing the Election by Region (Based on 1st Priority)

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

*Lee Jae-myung Negatives: Daejang-dong Special Treatment Allegations + Lee Jae-myung's Spouse's Corporate Card Controversy + Lee Jae-myung's Morality Controversy

**Yoon Suk-yeol Negatives: Yoon Suk-yeol's Spouse's False Career and Stock Manipulation Controversy + Yoon Suk-yeol's Shamanism Controversy

As can be seen in [Table 4], the content of the issues that influenced voters differs significantly depending on whom they voted for. For Yoon Suk-yeol voters, the real estate issue overwhelmingly influenced their decision, followed by the morality issues of Lee Jae-myung and his spouse. In contrast, for Lee Jae-myung voters, Yoon Suk-yeol's spouse's false career and stock manipulation controversy, and Yoon Suk-yeol's shamanism controversy influenced their decision, as did the late-stage unification of Yoon Suk-yeol and Ahn Cheol-soo. However, it is noteworthy that the issue of the Moon Jae-in administration's failed real estate policy also showed a response rate of 13% among Lee Jae-myung voters, which is not particularly low.

[Table 4] Major Issues and Supported Candidates

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

As such, it can be seen that the impact of each candidate's moral controversy on voting decisions is related to their support or opposition. Ultimately, the most important issue that influenced the presidential election can be summarized as the failure of the Moon Jae-in administration's real estate policy. To confirm the impact of the real estate issue on the election, we examined perceptions of the comprehensive real estate tax by region. As shown in [Table 5], Seoul showed high figures, and Daegu/Gyeongbuk also showed high figures.[2]When examining [Table 3] and [Table 5] together, it is evident that the real estate issue and the related comprehensive real estate tax had a significant impact in the Seoul region. While the Daegu/Gyeongbuk region also showed high figures, considering that it is traditionally a strong region for the People Power Party, the importance of the real estate issue's impact on voting decisions can be found in Seoul, which is free from regionalist politics.

As shown in [Table 6], not only the failure of real estate policy but also related tax issues significantly influenced support for candidates Lee Jae-myung and Yoon Suk-yeol. Voters who agreed that the comprehensive real estate tax was excessive and that tax reform should be carried out by the next government voted for Yoon Suk-yeol.

[Table 5] Regional evaluation of the comprehensive real estate tax

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

0- Strongly Disagree, 10- Strongly Agree.

[Table 6] Excessive Real Estate Holding Tax and Voting Candidates

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

Excessive Real Estate Holding Tax 0-Strongly Disagree, 10-Strongly Agree.

Next Government's Tax Reform 0-Not Important at All, 10-Very Important

[Table 7] Vote Share of Major Two Parties' Candidates in Seoul in Past Elections

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

As shown in [Table 7], candidates from the Democratic Party bloc who won past presidential elections consistently led in vote share in the Seoul metropolitan area. Candidates Kim Dae-jung in 1997, Roh Moo-hyun in 2002, and Moon Jae-in in 2017 all received higher vote shares in Seoul compared to candidates from conservative parties. Considering that the margin between Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung in the 2022 presidential election was only 0.73%, Lee Jae-myung's deficit in Seoul could be considered fatal in terms of regional vote distribution. The fact that Yoon Suk-yeol garnered more votes in Seoul can be closely linked not only to the surge in housing prices due to failed real estate policies but also to the 'punitive tax bomb' imposed as a countermeasure.

In this regard, the 2022 presidential election can be summarized as having been significantly influenced by voters' choices and the determination of the winner based on a retrospective evaluation of the Moon Jae-in administration and expectations for the correction of its negative policy legacies, rather than forward-looking expectations regarding the future governance of the main candidates. ■

[1] Based on the four years of the Moon Jae-in administration, Sejong City saw the highest increase in real estate prices (47.5%), followed by Daejeon (32.2%), Gyeonggi (18.5%), Daegu (17.9%), Incheon (14.8%), and Seoul (15.4%). Digital Times (2021.5.12.)http://www.dt.co.kr/contents.html?article_no=2021051202109932036007&ref=naver

[2]Although Gangwon and Jeju showed the highest rates, they were not included in the discussion due to a small number of cases.

■ Author: Kang Won-taek_Professor, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Seoul National University. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), UK. He has served as President of the Korean Political Science Association and President of the Korean Association of Party Studies. His main research areas include Korean politics, legislatures, elections, and political parties. His major publications include *Decisive Moments in Korean Politics* (2019), *Writing Social Science* (2019), *Korean Politics* (2019), *Democracy Made by Citizens* (2018, co-authored), *An Evaluation of 30 Years of Democratization in the Republic of Korea* (2017, co-authored), and *Presidential System, Parliamentary System, and Semi-Presidential System* (2016).

■ Contact and Editorial: Jeon Ju-hyun_EAI Research Fellow

    Inquiries: 02 2277 1683 (ext. 204) | jhjun@eai.or.kr