건축법상 지정도로에 관한 비교법적 연구- 한일간의 비교를 통한 그 시사점을 중심으로 -

According to Japanese architecture law Article 42 Clause 1。It is said that the roads are more than 4 meters in width. However, it may be the road in the building law even if an exception fits this and says with a road less than 4 meters. In other words, a road of building law Article 2 Clause 2 is it. In other words, as the road where it is less than 4 meters in width when buildings form a line in those days when this law is applied, It is considered on a road what an administrative agency appointed.　And the line of 2 meters of horizontal distance becomes the boundary line of the road from the centerline.　It is contents of Article 42 Clause 2.　This road is called `Clause 2 road or a considering road.　Each site retreats from a center ship to 2 meters before long. And It make that a road of 4 meters in width comes out a policy objective. By the way, the border with the site of an old road and each building is not often clear. However, it takes time with the expense that often makes this border. Therefore most administrative agencies appointed a road through a form called the notification conveniently (inclusion designation). This system settled a constant effect.　However, It leave a problem big on the site of the business. It may be said that one is a disposal-related problem.　When accept disposal characteristics of the notification, the proof comes to be in trouble. Therefore, this was a chance to make the precedent about the trust protection principle of 2006. And only the last to solve this is the maintenance of the road account book. However, It have effect of becoming it a road policy in Japan. It interpret law requirements loosely, and a precedent to do appears in succession if It will recognize it as road' if possible. In contrast, the road designation is not possible if do not transmit a planning permission in Korea. Therefore, in this way do wrong administrative advice in the building administration and cause many problems. In contrast, show a seal in reproof of wrong administrative advice in most precedents of Chancery when it is not the designated road in the building law. Therefore, show a seal in reproof of wrong administrative advice in most precedents of Chancery when it is not the designated road in the building law. However, most existing buildings which in this case were not able to meet road requirements can do the status quo by an existing building exception system. However, It come to cause a problem such as new construction becoming impossible. Therefore, it must revise a law so that there is road designation even if it do not transmit a planning permission earlier above all. It is in this way thought that there is the change possibility of the precedent.