헌법상의 재산권의 보장과 한계－헌법재판소 결정을 중심으로－

This study attempts to analyze the constitutional court's decision of laws based upon the public concept of the land as unconstitutionality or disagreement of constitution in the early 1990s. It then aims to scrutinize the constitutional suitability of current government's real estate policy. In the Korean constitution, property right is not absolutly unlimited, but for public interests, it is restricted. In particular, as land's limitedness and social aspects, the rights of land ownership is much more restricted compared to general property rights. Although the constitutional court decided events relating to the public concept of the land as unconstitutional, the public concept of the land itself is not denied. However the laws relating to the rights of land ownership must be consistent for the eradication of real estate speculation. Furthermore, for achieving the main purpose of the public concept of land, it should consider certain aspects, such as the current state of land, the condition or degree of speculative land transaction, and soon. These aspects should be left to legislator's discretion. However, for the achievement of the purpose, the scope of restriction must not be over the legislative discretion which could violate the principles of property rights. In other words, although the constitutional court approves that it is at the legislative body's discretion to put restriction on the rights of land ownership, if the restriction is over their legislative discretion or is remarkably irrational the court will decide unconstitutionality. The study finds that the government's real estate policy seems to take account of the previous constitutional court's decision of the public concept of the land. However, to prevent any decision of unconstitutionality, the details of the current restriction on real estate are more carefully prepared.