According to the investment banking (IB) industry on the 27th, the Seoul Rehabilitation Court will hold a creditors’ meeting at 3:00 p.m. on September 2 to review and vote on Homeplus’s rehabilitation plan. The meeting will be attended by Homeplus’s largest creditor, Meritz Financial, as well as major shareholder MBK Partners, secured creditors, and unsecured creditors. They are scheduled to conduct a final review of the second amended reorganization plan submitted by Homeplus and vote on whether to approve it.
From a “Dismissal Decision” Reversal to the Final Extension Deadline
To date, the deadline for approving Homeplus’s reorganization plan has been extended a total of three times. Originally set for March 4, 2026—within one year of the commencement of reorganization proceedings—the court first postponed the deadline to May and then extended it again to July.
In particular, in early July, the company faced the threat of bankruptcy after a decision to terminate the reorganization proceedings was issued due to difficulties in securing 200 billion won in emergency operating funds (DIP). However, following a dramatic agreement between Meritz and MBK to provide financial support, the court revoked the decision to terminate the reorganization proceedings on the 21st of that month, and the deadline for approving the reorganization plan was extended once again to September 4.
This creditors’ meeting is effectively Homeplus’s last chance to ensure its survival. Under the Debtor Rehabilitation Act, the deadline for approving a rehabilitation plan is a maximum of one year and six months from the date the rehabilitation proceedings were initiated, making September 4 the statutory deadline. If no outcome is reached at this meeting, the deadline will be missed. In effect, this is Homeplus’s final opportunity for a vote.
Homeplus initially submitted its reorganization plan last December and, after reflecting the status of asset sales and the demands of the creditor group, submitted a first revised plan on June 29 of this year. Subsequently, immediately after the reorganization proceedings were suspended and then resumed, the company submitted a second revised reorganization plan to the court on August 12.
The second amended plan includes a restructuring plan for stores and personnel to improve business viability, as well as specific financing and repayment measures to refinance approximately 1.5 trillion won in rehabilitation funds to repay existing public-interest claims and rehabilitation claims. The core elements of the plan are the release of collateral on sold stores and a refinancing structure based on improved performance.
Second Amended Proposal Includes Refinancing and Store Restructuring… Meeting Approval Threshold Is the Key
For the reorganization plan to receive court approval, it must meet the approval requirements at the creditors’ meeting. Pursuant to Article 237 of the Debtor Reorganization Act, final court approval is contingent upon obtaining the consent of at least three-quarters (75%) of the secured reorganization creditors, at least two-thirds (66.7%) of the reorganization creditors, and at least half (50%) of the shareholders.
If any one of these groups refuses to consent and the plan is rejected at the creditors’ meeting, the reorganization proceedings will be definitively terminated upon the expiration of the approval deadline on September 4. If the reorganization proceedings are terminated, Homeplus is expected to exit court-supervised reorganization and proceed with either court-ordered liquidation or bankruptcy proceedings initiated by the creditor group.
However, the market and industry view the likelihood of the revised reorganization plan being rejected at this meeting as low. The prevailing view is that, following detailed adjustments to the refinancing structure and repayment rates, the plan will proceed to approval.
An investment banking industry official stated, “The court has provided ample opportunity by utilizing the full maximum extension period of one year and six months, and since it previously issued a termination order only to reinstate the proceedings, it has exhausted all possible measures.” The official added, “From the creditors’ perspective, it would not be easy to refuse to vote and thereby shoulder the responsibility for Homeplus’s bankruptcy.”
