Downsizing Comprehensive Simulator

3.70

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Real Estate downsizing and relocation decision support

→

Step 2 Limitations of calculating capital gains tax, acquisition tax, and comprehensive property tax individually

→

Step 3 Lack of tools to compare tax + pension + living infrastructure + health insurance premium changes holistically

Problem

After children become independent, couples aged 50-63 looking to sell their Seoul apartment (approx. 1,000 sq ft, valued at approx. $600,000-$1,125,000) and relocate to outer suburbs or smaller cities must check capital gains tax (holding period, single-home tax exemption requirements), acquisition tax on the new home, health insurance premium changes (property-based recalculation), comprehensive income tax impact when receiving National Pension/Retirement Pension, and destination area hospital/transit/amenity accessibility—all on different websites. Between real estate agents (one each for selling and buying), Tax Accounting consultation (approx. $225-$375), and site visits (2-3 trips), they spend an average of 6 months and approx. $1,500-$3,000, yet still make the decision without knowing exactly 'how much monthly living costs will actually decrease after relocating.'

Solution

Users input current home details (size, market value, holding period) and 3 desired relocation areas on the web, and the system compares in a single table for each area: (1) estimated capital gains tax and acquisition tax, (2) estimated monthly health insurance premium change, (3) comprehensive income tax impact on pension income, and (4) hospital/public transit/grocery accessibility scores. It shows the 'current monthly fixed costs vs. post-relocation monthly fixed costs' difference on a monthly basis and calculates the break-even point for 'how many years until relocation becomes financially advantageous.'

Target: Couples aged 50-63, children independent, owning a large home (1,000+ sq ft in Seoul metro), considering downsizing or regional relocation

Revenue Model: Free: 1 area basic comparison. Paid (approx. $5.90 per transaction): 3-area detailed comparison PDF, monthly fixed cost simulation, break-even analysis

Ecosystem Role: Consumer

MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty

3.0/5

U Urgency

5.0/5

M Market

4.0/5

R Realizability

3.0/5

V Validation

4.0/5

NUMR-V Scoring System

N Novelty	1-5	How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency	1-5	How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market	1-5	Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability	1-5	Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation	1-5	Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.

SaaS N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20 Senior N=.25 U=.25 M=.05 R=.30 V=.15

Feasibility (65%)

Tech Complexity

24.0/40

Data Availability

20.8/25

MVP Timeline

20.0/20

API Bonus

0.0/15

Feasibility Breakdown

Tech Complexity	/ 40	Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability	/ 25	Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline	/ 20	Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus	/ 15	Bonus for viable public API leverage.

Market Validation (58/100)

Competition

8.0/20

Market Demand

6.2/20

Timing

16.0/20

Revenue Signals

10.5/15

Pick-Axe Fit

10.5/15

Solo Buildability

7.0/10

Validation Breakdown

Competition	/ 20	Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand	/ 20	Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing	/ 20	Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals	/ 15	Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit	/ 15	How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability	/ 10	Practicality for lean-team implementation.

Technical Requirements

Frontend [medium] Backend [medium] Data Pipeline [medium]

Dashboard