도시 및 주거환경정비법상의 관리처분계획과 명도청구

It is prescribed in the Aticle 49 ⑥ in the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, that the real estate owner cannot use his real estate after the determination and public notice of Management Disposal Project. Based on this Article, can the urban redevelopment association request that the owner should delever his estate to the accociation? According to the Supreme Court’s judicial precedent and lower instances’ precedent, it is possible. But, I think that this article means only the prohibition of the owner’s using. Namely, I think that this article doesn’t mean the owner’s delivery obligation. I think that in order to use the estate, the urban redevelopment association needs the decision of Land Tribunal or the permission of administrative agency or Land Tribunal, according the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation Therefor based on the Article 40 in the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents. Holding a different view, even if it is interpretated legally that the Article 49 ⑥ means the owner’s delivery obligation, I think that it should be interpretated on condition that liquidation money or relocation expense is performed to the owner in advance or simultaneously. And I think that the Supreme Court’s judicial precedent and lower instances’ precedent is the unconstitutional interpretation.