How to Save 100 Million Won in 5 Years with Incremental Savings

Opening your bank account on the last day of August reveals exactly where your New Year's resolutions ground to a halt. While some people have consistently maintained their January savings targets for eight straight months, others abandoned the rule entirely after skipping a single month in spring. The one-hour interview video titled "The Ultimate 2025 Wealth Building Guide - Author Kim Kyung-pil (Full Video)"(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLWkctNh7CM) on the YouTube channel Let's Play Economy was originally designed to help people set up plans at the start of the year. Yet, revisiting it two-thirds into the year cleanly splits its contents into two parts: the market forecast sections have already expired, leaving behind only the mechanics of building a savings structure.

Savings Depend on Sequence Rather Than Amounts - The 4-Step Budget

Photo: Daniel Deppe / flickr (CC BY)

The savings blueprint presented by author Kim Kyung-pil in this video consists of four steps. Step 1 locks down the total volume first by fixing what percentage of this year's income will be saved. Step 2 decides how to allocate that sum—whether to divide it across 12 months in regular installment savings or to mix installments with bonus lump-sum deposits. Step 3 designs the recurring monthly living budget using only the money left after deducting savings. Finally, Step 4 sets aside a dedicated budget in a separate account for irregular seasonal expenses like traditional holidays, auto insurance premiums, and winter clothing. The objective of these four steps is restructuring your bank account cash flow from saving what remains after spending to spending only what remains after pre-deducting savings.

Among these four steps, the point where plans actually fall apart is the final one. Steps 1 through 3 are low in difficulty and are tasks that typical budgeting apps already handle. Problems invariably erupt outside the regular budget ledger. In months hit with three overlapping weddings, auto insurance renewals, or a parent's birthday right next to a major holiday, the recurring living budget breaks first. The moment installment savings accounts are broken to plug that hole, the total savings volume locked down in Step 1 collapses entirely. The advice to treat irregular expenses not as unexpected exceptions but as regular budgeted items—and to separate their accounts in advance—sounds straightforward on paper, but it is effectively the single factor determining whether an annual savings plan survives. If you revisit this video in late August, it is far faster to tackle Step 4 first rather than restarting from Step 1.

The three primary spending caps highlighted in the same video interlock with this structure. The benchmarks prescribe housing costs within 15% of income, vehicle costs within 6 months of income, and travel within 5% of annual income. For vehicles, the rationale focuses on ongoing ownership costs rather than the purchase price tag alone. Using a domestic mid-sized SUV as an example, Kim Kyung-pil explains that true operating costs including depreciation run around 1.2 to 1.3 million won per month; thus, someone earning 3 million won buying that vehicle effectively reduces their real monthly paycheck to 1.7 million won. For the 5% travel budget, he justifies the limit by pointing out that vacation days comprise only about 2 to 3% of the year, making 5% a generous allocation. Viewing expenditures not as standalone price tags but as ratios against income tied to incoming future liability streams remains an applicable framework across any category.

Pre-Saving, Forced Saving, Regular Saving, and Incremental Saving: The Deciding Factor Lies in the Last One

Photo: Artsy Crafty / stocksnap (CC0)

The four principles presented for saving are pre-saving, forced saving, regular saving, and incremental saving. Kim Kyung-pil posits that there are only two kinds of people in the world: "those who save first and spend later, and those who spend first and save whatever is left." He flatly asserts that the latter group never successfully builds savings. Recommending fixed regular installment accounts over flexible savings stems from the same logic: eliminating structural room to negotiate taking this month off. If targeting 100 million won in 5 years, maintaining a flat monthly deposit requires 1.55 million won each month; however, starting at 1.305 million won and stepping up by 130,000 won each year yields that same 100 million won over the same 5-year timeline.

Among the four principles, the first three are essentially common sense; incremental saving is the only novel mechanism. While the mathematical difference between 1.55 million won and 1.305 million won is modest in total sum, it fundamentally alters the outcome by lowering the initial barrier to entry and slashing early drop-out rates. The annual step-up increment of 130,000 won is also cleverly calibrated: it is not overwhelmingly burdensome at any single stage, yet compounding across 5 years more than compensates for early shortfalls. While comparing savings escalation to adding barbell weight at the gym is somewhat clichéd, the underlying premise of fixing the target goal while progressively dialing up monthly contributions is highly actionable.

However, incremental saving rests on the assumption that wages increase every year, an assumption the video lets pass without scrutiny. In an economic phase where real wages fail to keep pace with inflation, wage increments are directed toward defending daily living expenses rather than boosting savings. For freelancers and the self-employed, an annual salary bump does not exist as an event at all. In these cases, rather than tying step-up adjustments to pay raises, it is better to lock them to fixed calendar dates such as every January 1st. While explaining that the purpose of a 100-million-won milestone is establishing a reference benchmark for savings velocity rather than the absolute nominal sum itself is valid, inflation continually erodes the real purchasing power of that 100 million won. The fact that the video incorporates a 2% inflation rate in some calculations while leaving the ultimate target fixed remains an inconsistency.

Calculations Showing That Even Retiring with 500 Million Won Runs Dry at Age 74

Photo: Direct Media / stocksnap (CC0)

The most striking numbers in this video emerge from the retirement simulation. Assuming someone retires at age 60 with 500 million won, spends 3.5 million won each month, and earns a 3% annual return via safe bank deposits, the funds last only until age 74. Doubling the return to 6% extends solvency by merely 4 years to age 78. In contrast, delaying full retirement to sustain even a modest monthly labor income of around 1.5 million won extends asset survival to age 86. The conclusion shows that maintaining small continuous earned income buys nearly three times as much runway compared to doubling investment yield. Alongside this, the video recommends building five diversified income pipelines: National Pension, retirement pension, personal pension, rental income created by downsizing housing, and self-actualizing economic activities.

The overarching conclusion is sound. During the asset decumulation phase, shortening the withdrawal duration exerts far greater arithmetic leverage than boosting investment yield. The rationale that 1 million won in senior earned income effectively delivers the punch of 2 million won holds true because spending does not occur during working hours. The pipeline concept—that stability derived from multiple diversified inflows outweighs absolute nominal volume—is convincingly argued through the vulnerability of relying entirely on commercial storefront rent for all living costs. Noting that National Pension payouts are clawed back if income exceeds certain thresholds provides practical grounding.

The flaw lies in applying this math strictly to assets already accumulated by retirement age. While comparing 3% versus 6% returns on 500 million won already in hand at age 60 makes the 4-year difference seem negligible, during the 30-year accumulation phase starting in one's 30s, that same return spread dramatically changes the final terminal wealth. Following the video's narrative alone could lead younger viewers to incorrectly dismiss investment returns as trivial, because an explanation distinguishing the accumulation phase from the decumulation phase is omitted. Assuming a flat monthly expenditure of 3.5 million won is also simplistic. Spending profiles in the first year of retirement rarely mirror those right before death; early active retirement years and late-stage years dominated by medical and nursing expenses trace completely different curves. A flat fixed-expense assumption eases calculation, but it obscures when actual retirement funding pressures peak.

How Far Do Savings Benchmarks by Income Tier Hold Up?

Photo: Jess Watters / stocksnap (CC0)

The video presents minimum monthly savings targets across income tiers in a table-like format: 2 million won for monthly incomes of 4 to 5 million won; 1.6 million won for 3 to 4 million won; 1.4 million won for 2.5 to 3 million won; and 950,000 to 960,000 won for incomes below 2.5 million won. The benchmark for the lowest bracket is grounded in the 2022 average starting salary for college graduates at small and medium enterprises (28.15 million won annually). Because minimal income tax applies at this level, net income is approximated at 2.4 million won monthly, with 40% yielding 960,000 won. Adding an annual 100,000 won step-up yields 120 million won after 7 years, which adjusts to roughly 105 million won in present value factoring in 2% inflation. The observation that someone in their mid-3 million won income bracket is often in greater financial jeopardy than someone in their early 2 million won bracket is also astute: the former purchases a car the instant they feel comfortable.

Yet this table carries an unstated prerequisite that represents the video's largest blind spot. Deducting 960,000 won from 2.4 million won leaves 1.44 million won. Earlier in the same video, the author acknowledged that over half of rental leases in the Seoul metropolitan area are monthly rent contracts. Demanding that an entry-level worker paying 600,000 to 700,000 won in monthly rent cover housing, food, transportation, and telecom on 1.44 million won is mathematically unrealistic. Applying the 15% housing cap to an income of 2.4 million won yields 360,000 won; surviving on that figure in the capital area is virtually impossible unless living with parents or staying in company dormitories. Thus, this benchmark table silently presumes housing costs are effectively subsidized without disclosing that condition. For those unable to hit the target, what remains is not an actionable method, but guilt.

Consequently, this guide should be interpreted based on target segments. For single entry-level workers with minimal housing burdens and salaried workers with stable incomes, targeting these nominal tier sums directly is reasonable. Conversely, single-earner households with dependents, urban renters facing steep monthly rent, and freelancers or business owners with volatile earnings should translate absolute figures into proportional ratios instead. Even if total savings volume is halved, preserving the underlying architecture of pre-saving, regular saving, and incremental saving builds the exact same financial discipline praised in the video. It is also worth noting that for individuals who have already accumulated over 100 million won, the utility of this table drops sharply; at that stage, financial success hinges on asset allocation rather than raw savings rates.

Overall Assessment: Agreement on Diagnosis, Conditional Agreement on Prescription

The point of agreement centers on the sequential cash-flow structure. The four-step budget—locking in total savings volume first before allocating recurring and irregular spending—accurately identifies that financial plans derail outside ledger sheets through unexpected, irregular expenses. Layering incremental savings (starting low and stepping up annually) on top of the common-sense trifecta of pre-saving, forced saving, and regular saving creates a highly workable blueprint. Lowering the entry barrier to 1.305 million won with an annual 130,000 won escalator rather than jumping immediately into 1.55 million won does far more to prevent early dropout than the other three principles combined.

Reservations arise when prescriptions are detached from real-world constraints. The income-tier savings benchmarks require housing costs to be essentially resolved for a 960,000 won deduction from a 2.4 million won paycheck to work, yet the video leaves this assumption unspoken. Applying this table blindly to young workers paying 600,000 to 700,000 won in rent creates an arithmetically impossible goal. Following a benchmark table that conceals housing assumptions leaves struggling savers with guilt rather than viable solutions. Incremental savings also assumes annual wage growth; freelancers and self-employed individuals with stagnant real wages or no formal pay raise events must deliberately schedule fixed step-up milestones. Furthermore, market forecast segments capturing point-in-time figures like real estate projections, PBR metrics, FX rates, and crypto rankings have already expired, becoming misinformation if repeated today.

3 Action Items for Today

1. List upcoming irregular expenses such as holidays, insurance premiums, and clothing, then move those funds to a separate account.
2. Fix total savings first as a ratio of income before budgeting remaining funds for recurring consumption.
3. Select a fixed calendar date and amount for next year's savings step-up and lock it into your calendar right now.

Revisiting this video eight months into the year means you do not need to rewrite your entire annual quota from scratch as if it were January. It is far more effective to list irregular expenditures expected over the remaining four months and isolate them into a dedicated account. Next, designate the exact date and step-up amount for next year's savings increase. Plans invariably break in predictable places; pre-emptively sealing those leaks represents half the battle in annual savings.