토지공개념의 헌법적 쟁점과 전망

In Korea History, land assets were subject to strong regulatory administration by the government. while a land market has been unstable of its demand and supply in due to the intensified land speculation through a compressed industrialization and urbanization from the 1960s to the 1980s, Government made introduction the first common concept of land assets by the inequality of land property as a political decision in 1990. However “land excess-profits tax act” and “ceilings on the ownership of housing sites act” and “restitution of development gain act” were ruled out the unconstitutionality by The Constitutional Court after the crisis of foreign currency, The common concept of land assets was retrenched since 2000s. As of 2012, the extreme gap of land ownership equality may prove an economic polarization. The upper 1 % owned 51.5 % of the land held by the private sector, 82.7 % by the upper 5 %, and 100% by the upper 28.7 % which the Gini coefficient of land ownership was between 0.75 and 0.92. In addition those unchecked presidents brought out the crisis of democratic government and the Constitutional rot. The New Democratic Government was born in the candle revolution, and made efforts for strengthen the second common concept of land assets through the Constitutional revision for fear of economic polarization and political polarization. At least, the common concept of Housing sites can take a consideration two taking measures: the direct regulation of the restitution of land capital gains and indirect regulation of land transaction and ceilings on the ownership of housing sites which directly affect in a land market. The former is more effective because it can increase economic effects or welfare without directly pressing the land market than the latter. The Constitutional Court has ruled a separation theory on the relationship between social constraints of land property rights and public takings under Article 23 of the Constitution. In other words, if the social limitations of land property is exceeded, Government has to just compensate by law against the public takings. However, it is difficult for the laymen to predict clearly the criteria for public takings of land assets. Therefore we can compare the criteria concerning about the fifth Amendment Constitution(Article 5) of United States. In short, the implementation of the common concept of land assets should be confirmed to the principle of human dignity and the rule of law on the basis of Constitution.