APT · SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON · NOTE 02

How 3.5% versus 5.0% changes the same loan

A rate sensitivity check for a fixed ₩480M principal and 30-year equal-payment schedule.

INPUT AND EVIDENCE LEDGER

Put the two cases on the same footing.

FieldValueOrigin
Loan principal₩480,000,000Held constant
Term30 years / 360 paymentsHeld constant
Lower-rate case3.5%Illustrative assumption
Higher-rate case5.0%Illustrative assumption

DECISION READING

Read the gap, not just the winner.

A property can fit at one assumed rate and fail the same household budget at another. APT should therefore expose the rate as an editable assumption rather than burying it inside a score.

REPRODUCIBLE WORK

The comparison ledger.

CheckFormula or ruleResult
3.5% paymentStandard equal-payment formulaAbout ₩2,155,415 per month
5.0% paymentSame principal and termAbout ₩2,576,744 per month
Monthly difference₩2,576,744 − ₩2,155,415About ₩421,329
First-year cash difference₩421,329 × 12About ₩5,055,948

SOURCE SNAPSHOT

Official context and the limited role it supports.

SENSITIVITY

Conditions that can reverse the gap.

  • Shorter terms usually raise the monthly payment while reducing total interest.
  • A larger cash contribution reduces both payments, but ties up more capital.
  • Actual products can use different repayment structures, fees, and rate-reset rules.

HUMAN ACCOUNTABILITY + AI USE RECORD

The owner is accountable; the technical checks were AI-assisted.

The TOOOLBOX site owner authorized the publication scope and remains the correction contact. AI assistance was used for drafting, implementation, arithmetic recomputation, and source-link checks. This record does not claim line-by-line human fact-checking or licensed professional review.

Record ID
TB-APT-02-20260906
Owner role
TOOOLBOX site owner and developer
Technical check date
2026-09-06
Human fact-check
No separate human fact-check recorded
AI use
Drafting, code, arithmetic, and link checks
Correction channel
Public contact page
  1. Recomputed both 360-payment schedules with the same ₩480M principal and term.
  2. Reconciled the ₩421,329 monthly gap to the ₩5,055,948 first-year difference.
  3. Verified that neither illustrative rate is described as a current offer or eligibility result.

BOUNDARIES

Claims this comparison cannot support.

  • The calculation assumes a constant nominal rate for the full term.
  • It excludes fees, insurance, early repayment, and lender-specific schedules.
  • The two rates are scenarios, not current offers.

MORE APT DECISION NOTES

Test the result yourself.

This note preserves a dated calculation. Change the inputs in the live workspace, or compare another evidence pattern below. Live source availability and results can differ from the dated example.