MBK, Homeplus's Largest Shareholder Amid Conflict with Meritz, Responsibility Debate Resurfaces

*This content was translated by AI.

"MBK needs to take responsible action"

As MBK Partners (MBK) and Meritz Financial Group (Meritz) have been raising their voices over the conditions for emergency operating funds (DIP financing) for Homeplus, the debate over MBK's responsibility as the largest shareholder has resurfaced.

Meritz recently approved 100 billion won in DIP financing to support Homeplus's recovery, conditional on guarantees from MBK and Kim Byeong-ju (Chairman). However, MBK has objected, stating it has already provided significant support to Homeplus, and argued that "Homeplus is a going concern whose livelihoods depend not on collateral but on countless employees and partner companies," urging Meritz to provide support.

MBK claims it has shouldered 400 billion won in funds and credit, including 40 billion won in personal gifts from Kim Byeong-ju (Chairman), loan guarantees, and MBK's own DIP financing during Homeplus's recovery process. However, some argue that much of this was not actual cash injection but rather loans or joint guarantees, making MBK's claims difficult to accept.

There is also skepticism about MBK's claim that it lacks the capacity for additional support. According to some reports, MBK is said to earn tens of billions of won annually just from management fees on its 330 billion dollars (approximately 50 trillion won) in assets under management. Furthermore, MBK stated in its annual letter last March that it distributed 1.7 billion dollars (approximately 2.614 trillion won) to investors last year. In particular, the third buyout fund invested in Homeplus reportedly achieved a 15.4% return last year.

Additionally, some point to the fact that MBK Chairman Kim Byung-ju holds estimated assets of approximately 9.9 billion dollars (about 15.23 trillion won), placing him second on the 2026 Forbes Korea Rich List, which supports the argument that MBK has substantial resources.

The attitudes of Homeplus and MBK during Meritz's decision-making process on DIP support have also sparked controversy. Initially, Homeplus requested a total of 300 billion won in DIP loans: 100 billion won from MBK and 100 billion won each from Meritz and the Korea Development Bank. However, after the Korea Development Bank expressed a negative response, Homeplus focused its request on Meritz.

Subsequently, it was recently revealed through media reports that Meritz was considering providing 100 billion won in DIP support, conditional on guarantees from MBK and Kim Byeong-ju (Chairman). In response, Homeplus issued a statement demanding a total of 200 billion won in support: an additional 100 billion won on top of the 100 billion won where MBK provides a joint guarantee. Industry observers note that MBK's attempt to minimize its responsibility as a major shareholder by claiming it is "an investment fund management company rather than a direct investor" while demanding additional burden from creditors like Meritz could be seen as pressure.

Meritz is a creditor that has lent approximately 1.3 trillion won to Homeplus, using its major stores as collateral. It is reported that only about 260 billion won has been recovered so far. The general assessment is that lending additional funds to creditors undergoing a rehabilitation process carries risk.

In this context, MBK argues that if Homeplus were to be liquidated, Meritz could secure an additional 1.56 trillion won in collateral value. The logic is that even if an additional 200 billion won is lent, a total of 1.8 trillion won could be recovered, so there is no problem. However, this is considered an estimate based on MBK's own calculations rather than actual collateral value. There are also differing opinions on this. Furthermore, even if Homeplus were liquidated, the responsibility lies with Homeplus and MBK, and there is no reason for Meritz to share the burden.

An industry official emphasized, "If the justification is to save the company, it is only natural that the largest shareholder, who has acquired and been involved in the management of the company, should take responsibility first." The official added, "It should start with MBK's responsible attitude, not pressure on creditors like Meritz. If MBK believes in Homeplus's continued corporate valuation, it should take the lead."

<© STARNEWS. All rights reserved. No reproduction or redistribution allowed.>

*This content was translated by AI.