(Pension Future Forum Statement) On the 2026 Parliamentary Audit of the National Pension Service (Posted October 18, 2026)

It is the Pension Future Forum's position that, since December last year (2025), political interference in the National Pension has become blatant under the name of a ‘new framework.’

That is why, from that point on, the Pension Future Forum issued statements expressing concern about political interference and held seminars on several occasions.

The asset allocation principles for the National Pension for 2026, already finalized through the National Pension Fund Management Committee in 2025, began to be changed from the end of 2025.

In January 2026, an unscheduled Fund Management Committee meeting was held, and the National Pension's domestic investment allocation was expanded on two occasions.

Through strategic and tactical asset allocation — in other words, by mobilizing every available means — the domestic investment allocation was expanded.

Here is the Pension Future Forum's position on rebalancing, which was especially contentious at this parliamentary audit.

After the National Pension Fund Management Committee met, the decision to suspend rebalancing until June 2026 was made public.

Here we wish to raise two issues.

First, there is the question of "why! the fund management strategy — so vitally important to the operation of the National Pension Fund — was voluntarily disclosed in advance."

Second, there is the question of "why! the rebalancing suspension ran until June 2026, of all dates."

Because this is hard to make sense of by normal reasoning, the release of the minutes of the Fund Management Committee meeting at which this decision was made is being demanded.

To the demand at the parliamentary audit for the minutes to be released, the answer was that releasing them would be difficult because they contain sensitive investment information.

This explanation appears hard to reconcile with the earlier measures and actions in which the most important investment information related to fund management was voluntarily disclosed.

Kim Sung-joo, Chairman of the National Pension Service, who until a few months ago took the position that the National Pension is not a tool for propping up the stock market,

answered at the parliamentary audit that, had the National Pension carried out rebalancing, sell orders of as much as 800 billion won a day would have dealt a heavy shock to the stock market.

These answers contradict each other.

That is because concern over a shock to the stock market and propping up the stock market are two sides of the same coin. It means propping up the stock market in another sense.

The point at issue on rebalancing is why! the principles were changed again and again.

On the morning of the parliamentary audit of the National Pension Service, lawmakers of the opposition People Power Party on the National Assembly Health and Welfare Committee held a press conference at the National Assembly Communication Hall on the management of the National Pension Fund.

Since what was said at that press conference was not properly reported in the press,

in the interest of the public's right to know,

(although maintaining political neutrality is an important operating principle of the Pension Future Forum)

we wish to attach to this Pension Future Forum statement

the statement read at that press conference.

The Pension Future Forum made this decision because it judged the People Power Party's argument on this matter to be the more valid one.

For the sake of the public's right to know, and

if only to block at the source any attempt to misuse the National Pension for political purposes,

the People Power Party must take the lead even more actively in uncovering the truth.

If uncovering the truth through a parliamentary investigation or other means ultimately proves impossible,

we strongly demand that the opposition parties, including the People Power Party, adopt "uncovering the truth about the irregular management of the National Pension Fund under way since the end of 2025" as their number-one pledge for the next general election.

That is because, given our political reality, this seems to be the only way to block at the source any intent to use the public's retirement savings for political purposes.

https://m.naver.com/shorts/?seedMediaId=4CA3C3CB36793C5991A684E49B65315D787C&serviceType=CLIP