Shinbundang Line Migeum Station Dispute: Seongnam vs Suwon
The Gyeonggi Administrative Appeals Committee ruled on Oct. 13 that Seongnam Mayor Lee Jae-myung abused his discretionary power regarding the installation of Migeum Station on the Shinbundang Line extension, according to a report by reporter Ahn Sang-il. The ruling follows a dispute over construction permits and a conflict between Seongnam and Suwon cities.
Why is there a dispute over Migeum Station?
The conflict centers on whether Migeum Station should be installed on the Jeongja-Gwanggyo section of the Shinbundang Line. Mayor Lee Jae-myung stated in an Oct. 28 press conference that Suwon City and Gwanggyo residents had cooperated in the decision to install the station.
Suwon City refuted these claims during a press conference on Oct. 31. Kim Ji-wan, Suwon’s transportation safety director, stated that Mayor Lee distorted the facts regarding Suwon’s agreement and demanded a clear explanation for the claims.
How was the economic feasibility of the station calculated?
A 2009 feasibility study by the Korea Transport Institute determined the station lacked economic viability, citing a benefit-cost (B/C) ratio of 0.94. Seongnam City later conducted its own 2010 study, which changed the proposal to a “stop” without a transfer passage.
This modification raised the B/C ratio to 1.05, which Seongnam used to justify the station’s installation. However, reporter Ahn Sang-il noted that the 2010 report relied on a “preliminary feasibility study” used for budget estimation rather than a formal “feasibility evaluation” required by the National Integrated Transport System Efficiency Act.
What are the legal and financial implications?
Under the Railroad Construction Act and the National Integrated Transport System Efficiency Act, new stations requested by an initiator must demonstrate economic viability to be implemented. Suwon City requested a joint expert verification of the costs and feasibility, which Seongnam City refused.
The dispute led to construction delays of over five months. According to the report, Seongnam City refused to cooperate on the relocation of public obstacles and cancelled park occupancy permits applied for by the project operator, Gyeonggi Railway Co., Ltd.
What may happen next?
Future developments could depend on the formation of a consultative body for the Shinbundang Line to find a reasonable alternative. If the station is built, the costs for construction and operation could potentially fall entirely on Seongnam City.

The administrative fallout may continue if the city persists in using preliminary reports to pressure the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs through political channels.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the ruling of the Gyeonggi Administrative Appeals Committee?
The committee ruled on Oct. 13 that the Mayor of Seongnam had deviated from and abused his discretionary power regarding permit approvals.
What is the difference between the two B/C ratios mentioned?
The Korea Transport Institute found a B/C ratio of 0.94 (not feasible) in 2009, while Seongnam City’s 2010 study found a B/C ratio of 1.05 by removing the transfer passage from the design.
Who is the operator of the Shinbundang Line extension?
The project is being implemented by Gyeonggi Railway Co., Ltd. as a private investment project.
Do you believe local government disputes over transit infrastructure should be settled by administrative committees or joint expert panels?