What Mirae Asset’s win over Brookfield means for Korean real estate

After nearly three years of legal dispute, South Korea’s Mirae Asset Global Investments has won an international arbitration case against Canada’s Brookfield Asset Management over the return of a 200 billion won ($140 million) down payment for the failed acquisition of the International Finance Center Seoul.

On Monday, the Singapore International Arbitration Center ordered Brookfield to return the full down payment to Mirae Asset, along with interest for the delay and all arbitration-related costs, which are estimated at between 70 billion and 80 billion won. The ruling is final and cannot be appealed, bringing the prolonged conflict between the two asset managers to a close.

In May 2022, Mirae Asset was selected as the preferred bidder to acquire IFC Seoul, a landmark mixed-use complex in Yeouido, for 4.1 trillion won. The property encompasses three office towers, the Conrad Seoul Hotel, and a shopping mall, making it one of the largest commercial real estate assets in Korea.

To secure the deal, Mirae Asset deposited 200 billion won and planned to finance the acquisition through a real estate investment trust. However, Korea's Land Ministry disapproved the REIT, citing the plan’s heavy reliance on loans. With the regulatory hurdle blocking the transaction, the acquisition stalled.

Mirae Asset argued that the failure to complete the deal was due to circumstances beyond its control and that the full deposit should be refunded under the terms of the contract. The company maintained it had made “best efforts” to secure financing and regulatory approval, even pursuing alternative funding options.

Brookfield, on the other hand, refused to return the deposit, claiming that Mirae Asset had not done enough to obtain government approval and thus had breached the agreement.

The dispute was brought before the Singapore International Arbitration Center in 2022. After nearly three years of proceedings, the tribunal sided with Mirae Asset, ruling that the Korean firm had fulfilled its contractual obligations and exercised sufficient effort to complete the transaction.

The victory marks a major milestone for Mirae Asset, not only for recovering its funds but also for reinforcing its credibility in handling cross-border disputes.

This is the second major global legal victory for Mirae Asset. In 2021, the firm won a separate case against China’s Anbang Insurance over a 700 billion won deposit from a failed deal to acquire 15 hotels in the United States. In that case, Mirae Asset successfully argued that Anbang had concealed ongoing litigation affecting the properties.

Industry sources say both rulings highlight Mirae Asset’s focus on risk management and deal discipline, as the company continues to expand globally through mergers and acquisitions.

While the arbitration ruling closes the legal dispute, Brookfield still faces challenges selling the IFC Seoul complex. After Mirae Asset’s withdrawal, Brookfield sold the Conrad Seoul Hotel portion of the property to Singapore’s ARA Asset Management for 415 billion won in 2024.

However, the office towers and retail mall remain unsold, despite their strong performance. The complex had a vacancy rate of just 0.5 percent as of the end of 2023, but its high price tag has deterred potential buyers.

Brookfield, which purchased IFC Seoul for 2.55 trillion won in 2016, has since turned the asset into one of Seoul’s prime commercial properties after years of high vacancy and weak retail performance. Instead of lowering the price, the Canadian firm is now seeking to establish a continuation fund, effectively restructuring ownership among investors and postponing the divestment.

“Prime office assets in Seoul remain expensive,” said an official from a local real estate asset management firm. “Finding a buyer capable of meeting Brookfield’s valuation will not be easy.”

For Mirae Asset, the win underscores its growing clout in global finance and its ability to defend its position in high-stakes international deals.

For Brookfield, the decision adds another setback in its long-running attempt to exit one of Korea’s most prestigious but difficult-to-sell real estate assets.

As Korea’s commercial property market remains resilient yet tight, the outcome offers a reminder that even landmark assets like IFC Seoul are not immune to regulatory and financial friction — and that global players must navigate both legal and market risks with equal precision.