"그는 자기의 집이 있어요."
Translation:He has his own house.
• 그는 / he
• 자기의 집 / own house
• 있다 / to have
“His” is implied by the subject pronoun.
"He's his own house."
Should I be getting this as the recommended correct answer? It seems off.
If I am not mistaken you can only contract "has" on Present Perfect. "He has been to Korea"/"He's been to Korea". But not here: "He has a house" (Simple Present).
That is correct. Save with "have"--"You've been to Korea" or "They've been to Korea" are acceptable, while "I've a house" or "They've cars" is not. (I think I've seen "have" contracted outside of Present Perfect in some archaic texts, but even in archaic texts it's very rare.) However, "has" is even more unacceptable, because the contracted form "s/he's" is also the contracted form of "s/he is" and would be read that way in any usage other than a Present Perfect. So "He's his own house" would be read as "He is his own house"--I didn't even realize the contraction was intended to be "he has" at first. I think "had" can only be contracted in Past Perfect. So, "I gave him a DVD, but he'd already seen it" is acceptable, but "He'd a car until he sold it" is not.
I think you should have the particle 에/에서 (not entirely sure which one) attached to 집 to compose the sentence you mentioned.
Aa yes. I think you are right about the particle 에. Thank you for helping.
I think it is because the verb 있다 does not take an object. So "the thing" you are talking about takes the 'topic particle' (이/가).
Because the verb is not to have, the verb is to exist ("there is"). To say "I have a car" in Korean, you actually have to say, "Regarding me, a car exists" or "Me[topic] car[subject] exists."