The key to the current Homeplus situation is that the two axes of ‘funding’ and ‘responsibility of major shareholders’ run in parallel. Homeplus claims that it has extinguished the urgent fire by securing about 120 billion won in funds through the recent sale of Homeplus Express, but this amount is far short of the 200 billion won needed for overall revival. Accordingly, Homeplus is strongly requesting an emergency operating fund (DIP) loan from Meritz Financial Group, but Meritz, the creditor, is maintaining its position that support is impossible unless the majority shareholder, MBK Partners, clearly shares responsibility. In particular, the battle of wits between the creditors, who are demanding joint guarantees from MBK Chairman Kim Byeong-ju and additional contributions of private funds, and the major shareholders, who have already done enough, are seen as an irresponsible battle that guarantees the survival of the company.

Those who are suffering the most amidst the power struggle between these giant capitals are none other than the small and medium-sized merchants doing business with Homeplus. According to a survey conducted by the Korea Federation of Small and Medium Businesses, as many as 8 out of 10 companies are experiencing severe management crises due to delays in payment settlement, with the average unsettled amount reaching a whopping 770 million won. Companies that depended on Homeplus for more than half of their sales have been unable to collect payments for several months, making it difficult not only to pay for raw materials but also to pay labor costs. For them, the revival of Homeplus is not simply the fate of a business partner, but a life-or-death decision that determines tomorrow's survival.

As the situation becomes more serious, the government and courts are also busy working. The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs came up with a financial support measure worth 30 billion won to prevent a series of bankruptcies among production and distribution companies, and the court threatened to abolish the rehabilitation procedure if a specific financing plan was not submitted by the 30th. However, these measures are closer to emergency measures to temporarily extinguish a crisis on the verge of explosion rather than a fundamental solution. Moreover, the Victims' Victims' Committee has come forward to criticize the moral hazard of major shareholders and demand substantial capital contributions, so the conflict among stakeholders surrounding Homeplus is reaching a point where it is reaching a point where it is likely to escalate.

It is significant that sales showed some recovery as product supply normalized after the sale of Homeplus Express was completed. Paradoxically, this is also a hopeful sign that Homeplus will be able to fully normalize its operations if only 200 billion won of funds are properly invested and the product supply chain is normalized. However, this hope can only become a reality if there is a transparent flow of capital and the determination of responsible management. As long as major shareholders only seek out their own profits or show an attitude of avoiding responsibility, the liquidity crisis that Homeplus is experiencing will never be easily resolved, and the damage will be passed on to field workers and small suppliers.