Compare rental and purchase for South Korean site-office, storage, or temporary-facility containers using deposits, transport, crane lifts, installation, recurring costs, relocations, restoration, and residual value.
These are not market benchmarks. Replace every value with like-for-like quotes and contract terms.
Match the use, size, quantity, time horizon, and relocation count across both alternatives.
Confirm which deposit, rent, transport, lifts, setup, moves, return, and restoration items the contract includes.
Enter actual purchase, installation, maintenance, insurance, moving, disposal, and resale evidence.
| Cost category | Rental PV | Purchase PV |
|---|---|---|
| Equipment or deposit | 2,000,000 KRW | 15,000,000 KRW |
| Setup, foundation, electrical, and insulation | 4,400,000 KRW | 4,600,000 KRW |
| Monthly rental fees | 31,577,951 KRW | 0 KRW |
| Maintenance, insurance, and exclusions | 877,165 KRW | 2,339,107 KRW |
| Transport | 3,086,057 KRW | 3,086,057 KRW |
| Crane and lifting | 2,320,001 KRW | 2,320,001 KRW |
| Restoration and selling costs | 366,057 KRW | 640,599 KRW |
| Residual and deposit credits | -1,830,283 KRW | -7,321,133 KRW |
| Period | Period rental PV | Period purchase PV | Cumulative rental PV | Cumulative purchase PV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year 1 (months 1-12) | 10,924,086 KRW | 787,324 KRW | 18,924,088 KRW | 21,987,322 KRW |
| Year 2 (months 13-24) | 13,159,860 KRW | 3,121,509 KRW | 32,083,948 KRW | 25,108,831 KRW |
| Year 3 (months 25-36) | 10,712,998 KRW | -4,444,199 KRW | 42,796,947 KRW | 20,664,631 KRW |
| Residual scenario | Residual value per unit | Purchase PV | Lower cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 70% | 2,800,000 KRW | 22,860,971 KRW | Purchase |
| 100% | 4,000,000 KRW | 20,664,631 KRW | Purchase |
| 130% | 5,200,000 KRW | 18,468,291 KRW | Purchase |
This result is not a permit, filing, or safety determination. Before installation in Korea, review Building Act Article 20, Enforcement Decree Article 15, local ordinances, and whether Occupational Safety and Health Standards Rules Articles 38 through 40 apply to the heavy-load and lifting work.
A site office or temporary storage container starts consuming cash before it is usable.
Delivery access, truck distance, crane reach, lifting, ground preparation, supports, electrical work, insulation, fit-out, stairs, and canopies can all change the installed cost.
A move between sites repeats transport and usually creates both a loading lift and an unloading lift.
At the end, rental may require return transport and restoration before a deposit is refunded, while ownership may require removal, sale preparation, and a buyer before residual value becomes cash.
This calculator places those cash flows on a monthly timeline of up to 240 months.
It reports nominal total cost of ownership, present-value TCO, equivalent monthly cost, monthly cost per container, an operating crossover month, a break-even monthly rental fee, and residual-value sensitivity.
It is a quote-normalization and planning tool for land-based site facilities, not a shipping-container freight or marine leasing calculator.
Purpose and size are scope labels; they do not apply hidden price multipliers.
Select site office, storage, temporary lodging, or another use, then confirm that rental and purchase meet the same functional requirement.
Quantity and months determine scale and timing, while the relocation count places moves evenly between initial delivery and final removal.
The annual discount rate converts future cash flow to the value-date equivalent.
General escalation applies to recurring maintenance, insurance, and relocation costs, while rental escalation applies only to monthly rent.
Use zero rental escalation for a contractually fixed fee and keep all rates on a consistent nominal basis.
Separate monthly rent and refundable deposit from delivery, return, crane lifts, installation, foundation, electrical work, insulation, annual exclusions, relocation, and restoration.
The model counts one initial crane lift, two lifts for each relocation, and one final return lift per unit.
Enter the refund rate after realistic damage, cleaning, unpaid-charge, and contract deductions, not an assumed perfect refund.
Separate the body price from delivery, lifting, installation, foundation, electrical work, insulation, maintenance, insurance, relocation, terminal transport, restoration, and selling preparation.
Residual value is the amount expected to be recoverable in the final analysis month, supported by a current resale indication or an internal reuse decision.
If a buyer pays for loading and transport, set the corresponding owner-paid terminal inputs to zero.
Foundation, electrical, and insulation costs may be identical in both alternatives and therefore may not change the difference.
They still belong in the model when the objective includes total project funding and initial cash.
When a rental supplier includes supports or fit-out but a seller does not, the two alternatives should intentionally have different inputs.
For month m, the discount factor is one plus the annual discount rate raised to m divided by 12.
The model divides that month's net cost by the factor and adds time-zero cash to obtain present-value TCO.
When the discount rate is zero, nominal and present-value TCO are equal.
PV TCO = initial cash + sum(monthly net cash flow / (1 + annual rate)^(month / 12))
The model converts PV TCO into a level monthly payment with the same economic value.
This makes alternatives with very different initial cash easier to compare against a monthly budget.
This is the first month when cumulative purchase PV is no higher than cumulative rental PV using initial, recurring, and completed relocation costs.
Terminal credits are excluded, so use the full PV comparison for the final decision.
The calculator solves for the monthly rent per unit that makes rental PV equal purchase PV while every other rental input stays fixed.
It is a negotiation reference for one defined scope, not a universal market price.
| Stage | Rental | Purchase | Evidence to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start | Deposit, delivery, lifting, and installation | Body, delivery, lifting, and installation | Foundation, power, and fit-out inclusions |
| Use | Monthly rent and excluded recurring costs | Maintenance, repair, and insurance | Escalation and responsibility boundaries |
| Relocation | One transport and two lifts per move | One transport and two lifts per move | New access, ground, and exclusion zones |
| End | Return, lift, restoration, less deposit refund | Removal, lift, restoration, selling cost, less residual value | Deductions and responsibility for transport |
The fictional default uses two 20-foot site-office containers for 36 months with one relocation in month 18.
It enters KRW 450,000 rent per unit per month, KRW 1,000,000 deposit per unit, KRW 7,500,000 purchase price per unit, KRW 4,000,000 residual value per unit, a 3% annual discount rate, and 2% general and rental escalation.
These values reproduce the calculation and explain the interface; they are not a 2026 national average, recommendation, or supplier quote.
| Metric | Rental | Purchase |
|---|---|---|
| Initial cash | KRW 8,000,000 | KRW 21,200,000 |
| Nominal TCO | KRW 44,418,440 | KRW 20,396,320 |
| Present-value TCO | KRW 42,796,947 | KRW 20,664,631 |
| Equivalent monthly cost | KRW 1,243,824 | KRW 600,584 |
| Monthly cost per unit | KRW 621,912 | KRW 300,292 |
| Transport and crane cost | KRW 5,648,000 | KRW 5,648,000 |
Purchase PV is KRW 22,132,316 below rental PV in this scenario.
Purchase becomes no higher on operating cumulative PV in month 16, before terminal credits, and the full-PV break-even rent is KRW 134,605 per unit per month.
That economic advantage does not remove the need to fund the larger initial cash amount or manage resale risk.
At 70% of the entered residual value, purchase PV is KRW 22,860,971.
At 100% it is KRW 20,664,631, and at 130% it is KRW 18,468,291, while rental PV stays KRW 42,796,947.
A close real quotation can change winner when residual evidence weakens, so the sensitivity table matters more than one optimistic resale estimate.
| Period | Rental period PV | Rental cumulative PV | Purchase period PV | Purchase cumulative PV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | KRW 10,924,086 | KRW 18,924,088 | KRW 787,324 | KRW 21,987,322 |
| Year 2, including month 18 move | KRW 13,159,860 | KRW 32,083,948 | KRW 3,121,509 | KRW 25,108,831 |
| Year 3, including exit credits | KRW 10,712,998 | KRW 42,796,947 | KRW -4,444,199 | KRW 20,664,631 |
The negative purchase period in year 3 is not free operation; it is the net effect of terminal residual recovery after final costs.
Rental deposit refund is also a terminal credit, but the deposit still creates a financing cost when paid at time zero and returned later.
Compare gross outflow, terminal credits, and PV together so a large refund or resale figure does not conceal the cash needed before recovery.
Rental often preserves cash and avoids sale administration when the project is only several months.
Return transport, minimum term, early termination, and damage deductions can still make headline rent misleading.
Repeated rent can make ownership economical over a long stable period.
Test corrosion, roof sealing, doors, repainting, insurance, removal, and conservative resale instead of treating ownership as maintenance-free.
Transport and crane work may dominate when containers move repeatedly.
Recheck access width, overhead obstacles, lifting radius, ground bearing, traffic control, and fresh utility works at every location.
A purchased container moved into another confirmed project can create internal reuse value instead of sale proceeds.
Use the residual input only for the value the organization can support at the horizon date, and include the transport, refurbishment, storage, and approval work needed to realize it.
Run a low case that assumes delayed reuse or a weaker buyer to expose decision dependence on one terminal assumption.
A cost result does not decide whether a container is a building, temporary building, reportable structure, or permitted use at a particular site.
Classification can depend on location, land rights, fixing method, purpose, dimensions, duration, rooftop placement, local ordinance, and other statutes.
Confirm the actual plan with the competent city, county, or district office and appropriate building, structural, electrical, fire, sanitation, and safety professionals before contracting or work.
| Current source checked | Relevant boundary | What the calculator does not decide |
|---|---|---|
| Building Act, MST 273437, Article 20, effective February 27, 2026 | Provides the permission and reporting framework for temporary buildings, including reporting before work for decree-defined cases. | Whether this site and structure require permission or reporting. |
| Enforcement Decree of the Building Act, MST 288339, Article 15, effective July 28, 2026 | Paragraph 5 item 8 names container-like temporary offices, warehouses, and lodging, excluding rooftop construction in the current text; paragraph 7 addresses duration and local-ordinance extensions. | Eligibility, rooftop treatment, duration approval, extension, or compliance with local rules. |
| Occupational Safety and Health Standards Rules, MST 273603, Articles 38 to 40 and Annex 4 key 000400E | Addresses advance survey and work plans for heavy-load handling, work direction, signals, and measures against falls, drops, overturning, crushing, and collapse. | Whether a plan is sufficient, who is qualified, or whether a lift is safe. |
A crane price entered in the model does not prove that advance surveys, lift planning, competent direction, signals, exclusion zones, rigging, or ground controls are included.
Ask the contractor to define equipment capacity, lift radius, support conditions, traffic control, roles, and the work-plan boundary in writing.
Pause work when actual site conditions differ from the agreed plan.
No.
Purchase can have lower PV but require much more time-zero cash, while rental can preserve liquidity but accumulate a higher economic cost.
Review initial cash, payment timing, credit limits, and downside scenarios alongside PV.
The deposit is cash paid now and recovered later.
With a positive discount rate, the future refund has a lower present value, representing the opportunity cost of tied-up funds.
A refund rate below 100% adds a direct loss as well.
The model treats an intermediate move as loading at the departing site and unloading or placement at the receiving site.
Initial placement and final removal each add one lift.
Adjust the per-lift amount or included items when a real contractor prices the operation differently.
No.
The legal references are verification prompts, not an automated classification.
Obtain location-specific confirmation from the competent authority before installation, especially for rooftop placement, lodging, long duration, or restricted land.
Use one consistent basis across all alternatives.
A business that can recover input VAT may compare consistently exclusive amounts, while a final cash budget may need inclusive amounts and timing.
Do not mix VAT-inclusive rent with VAT-exclusive purchase and works quotations.
The relocation count is placed evenly for a compact planning model.
When known dates differ materially, run separate staged scenarios or use the annual cash-flow output as a reconciliation starting point.
Preserve the same total scope when comparing the alternatives.
Source status was checked on August 3, 2026.
NIST Handbook 135e2022 supports the lifecycle present-value method; it does not supply Korean container prices, service lives, discount rates, or residual values.
South Korean statutes are cited to define approval and safety questions only and do not create an automatic legal result inside the cost model.
Enter the real proposals, save the assumptions beside each source document, and compare at least a base case and a conservative terminal-value case.
Then record who confirmed placement, utilities, fire and sanitation requirements, lifting controls, contract exit, deposit deductions, and resale or reuse evidence.
The stronger decision is the one that remains affordable and executable when those assumptions are challenged.