South Korean stocks tumbled more than 8% on Friday, triggering a 20-minute trading halt after a sharp selloff in semiconductor stocks and renewed weakness in global technology shares.
The benchmark KOSPI index fell 8.18% to 8,199.81, extending losses from earlier in the week and putting the index on course for its steepest weekly decline in more than three months. Trading was temporarily suspended after the benchmark triggered circuit breakers for the second time this week.
The latest halt marked the fifth activation of circuit breakers this year and only the 11th such instance in the history of the Korean stock market, highlighting the sharp increase in market volatility.
The selloff followed weakness on Wall Street overnight, where technology stocks came under pressure as investors reassessed the pace of artificial intelligence spending despite strong demand signals from the sector.
South Korea's heavyweight chipmakers led the decline. Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, which together account for more than half of the KOSPI's market capitalisation, fell more than 9% each. Losses also spread to other large-cap stocks, with LG Energy Solution dropping over 7%, while automakers Hyundai Motor and Kia declined sharply.
The benchmark index has fallen 9.4% this week, marking its worst weekly performance since early March. Despite the correction, the KOSPI remains up about 95% this year after posting a 76% gain in 2025, reflecting the strong rally driven by artificial intelligence and semiconductor stocks.
Market breadth remained weak, with 848 stocks declining against 61 advancing. Foreign institutional investors were heavy sellers, offloading shares worth around 3 trillion won during the session.
The decline comes even as Samsung Group is expected to unveil a major domestic investment plan next week, reportedly involving up to 1,000 trillion won over the next decade, including significant investments in semiconductor manufacturing.
(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views, and opinions given by experts are their own. These do not represent the views of the Economic Times.)
