Kim Byung-joo, Chairman of MBK Partners / Graphic by Bu Kwang-woo
, ‘As Homeplus has entered court receivership, attention is focused on the intention behind MBK Partners Chairman Kim Byung-joo’s belated decision to contribute his personal assets. There are questions about the sincerity of acting on behalf of small business owners more than ten days after deciding on the sudden corporate rehabilitation process, especially when this wasn’t immediately apparent from the beginning.’,
,
, ‘Criticism has emerged that he was forced to address the situation amid growing voices of reproach from public opinion, political circles, and future negotiation partners for Homeplus’s normalization.’,
,
, ‘According to MBK on the 17th, Chairman Kim stated in a position statement distributed by the company the previous day, “I have decided to contribute my personal assets so that small business owners supplying goods to Homeplus under court management can receive their payments smoothly.”‘,
,
, ‘He also emphasized, “As the major shareholder of Homeplus, MBK is listening to the voices of various stakeholders” and “will fulfill its social responsibilities related to the rehabilitation process.” Furthermore, he stated, “We are focusing our best support and efforts so that Homeplus can quickly graduate from the rehabilitation process and return to a normal trajectory.”‘,
,
, ‘This move is interpreted as a response to burgeoning criticism of MBK after Homeplus abruptly filed for court receivership. There has been accountability sentiment arising from MBK’s explanation of Homeplus’s current situation as needing to address short-term debt repayment pressures and potential problems, leading directly to the corporate rehabilitation card. This contrasts with expectations that the owner might propose self-rescue measures or take the lead if it were an owner-led company.’,
,
, ‘Although Chairman Kim has finally stepped forward, he missed the chance to curb negative public opinion early due to delay. From the start of Homeplus’s court management to the announcement of this asset contribution, over ten days elapsed. Homeplus applied for rehabilitation, which was accepted by the Seoul Rehabilitation Court, on the 4th of this month.’,
,
, ‘In the meantime, political circles also became involved. Earlier, the National Assembly’s Political Affairs Committee decided to hold an urgent inquiry related to Homeplus on the 18th after a meeting on the 11th, summoning Chairman Kim, △Kim Kwang-il, Vice Chairman of MBK and Co-CEO of Homeplus △Jo Ju-yeon, Co-CEO of Homeplus △Geum Jeong-ho, President of ShinYoung Securities △Kang Kyung-mo, Vice Chairman of Homeplus Store Association as witnesses.’,
,
, ‘This Political Affairs Committee is likely to further intensify scrutiny on Chairman Kim. He has submitted a non-attendance reason, stating he does not intervene in the management of individual companies where investments are complete. Instead, he intends to respond to the inquiry in writing later if sufficient answers are not given.’,
,
, ‘It is interpreted that Chairman Kim changed his stance not simply because of public criticism, considering he didn’t mention asset contribution even when parliamentary summons were discussed. The financial investment industry suggests that practical factors ultimately moved him.’,
,
, ‘For MBK, the biggest risk lies in the creditors, particularly Meritz Financial Group’s judgment. Meritz Financial holds 1.2 trillion won of Homeplus’s 1.4 trillion won financial exposure. Should Meritz Financial disagree, Homeplus’s rehabilitation blueprint might be shelved without being unveiled.’,
,
, ‘The problem is that neither side has properly set up a negotiation table yet. MBK prepared a rehabilitation plan with Homeplus management and initiated a committee with major creditors, including Meritz Financial, but there is no concrete action yet.’,
,
, ‘There is inevitable dissatisfaction among creditors regarding MBK’s actions thus far. It may seem like they are trying to adjust debts without self-rescue measures or additional resource contributions. Considering MBK’s actions of disposing of prime Homeplus real estate assets and promoting the partial sale of some business units, there is reason to question their commitment to management normalization.’,
,
, ‘The official complaints from the financial investment industry reflect the financial sector’s mistrust towards MBK. About 20 securities and asset management firms related to Homeplus’s short-term bonds held the first joint meeting on the 10th regarding this situation. Homeplus’s bonds, based on card receivables, include asset-backed short-term bonds (ABSTB), corporate bonds, and electronic short-term bonds, totaling 600 billion won.’,
,
, ‘Particularly, ShinYoung Securities, one of the main underwriters of Homeplus ABSTB, is considering criminal charges against MBK. It is suspected that MBK forged ahead with issuing ABSTB, knowing the possibility of a credit downgrade that led to Homeplus’s corporate rehabilitation, potentially passing losses to individual investors.’,
,
, ‘An industry insider mentioned, “Homeplus’s court management is not merely a company’s rehabilitation but an issue directly tied to MBK’s reputation” and “it will be a case to determine future trust for parties negotiating with MBK.”‘