S

Jeonse Deposit Return Progress Tracker

4.20

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Corporate future business transformation trend
→
Step 2 Real estate market structural change
→
Step 3 Jeonse deposit non-return crisis
→
Step 4 Step-by-step tracking and guide for deposit return

Competitor references

No usable source links are available for this idea. Its signal notes and scores need independent verification.

Problem

For tenants in their 50s-60s, the process of getting their deposit back when a Jeonse lease expires is complex and lengthy. Each step—sending a content-certified document, registering a lease right, filing a claim with a guarantee insurance, and legal procedures—has different deadlines and required documents. Missing any one step can delay the return of the deposit by several months. Lawyer consultation costs 100,000-300,000 KRW (approx. $75-$225) per case, and the Legal Aid Corporation has a waiting period of 2-3 months.

Solution

On the web, users input the lease expiration date and current situation (landlord refusal to return, loss of contact, whether deposit guarantee insurance is in place, etc.), and the service shows a step-by-step roadmap to getting the deposit back. It provides specific guidance on required documents, deadlines, application methods, and costs for each step, along with notifications for next actions.

Target: Ages 45-60, living on Jeonse, deposit of 100 million KRW (approx. $75,000) or more, lease expiring within 6 months or currently experiencing delayed return.
Revenue Model: Free basic roadmap. Premium (automatic generation of step-by-step document templates + draft of content-certified document + legal consultation connection) at 19,900 KRW (approx. $15) per transaction.
Ecosystem Role: Regulation
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
3.0/5
U Urgency
5.0/5
M Market
5.0/5
R Realizability
4.0/5
V Validation
5.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20

Feasibility (66%)

Tech Complexity
24.0/40
Data Availability
21.7/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (65/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
18.0/20
Revenue Signals
12.0/15
Pick-Axe Fit
13.5/15
Solo Buildability
7.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Frontend [medium] Backend [medium]
Dashboard