재개발, 재건축 입주권 변화에 대한 대응방안 고찰 -대법원 1세대 다물권자 판례사례를 중심으로-

In the Republic of Korea, a substantial 75% of individual wealth is held in real estate, an unusually high percentage compared to other nations. Therefore, a variety of issues and information pertaining to real estate often surface as societal concerns. A recent notable societal issue is fraud related to ‘Jeonse’, a unique Korean long-term lease system. The widespread victimization from Jeonse fraud has caused significant social disruption, prompting the proposal of special legislation. This is because real estate, which is intrinsically linked to livelihood as one of the fundamental necessities alongside clothing and food, often surfaces as a societal concern. Meanwhile, as nationwide attention is focused on real estate, a Supreme Court precedent in 2023 surrounding the distribution qualification of Members in redevelopment and reconstruction brought changes to the distribution qualification System through a verdict that deviated from previous interpretations. Specifically, the criteria for qualifying for the distribution qualification of Members of the redevelopment association has been altered due to the Supreme Court’s ruling. The necessity of providing diverse information has been raised so that innocent citizens no longer suffer due to a lack of information about real estate law. Accordingly, this study aims to examine the issues arising from this situation by focusing on the Supreme Court case regarding single-person (household) multi-owner distribution qualification as of June 1, 2023, and proposes solutions to countermeasure these problems. Under the division of Article 39, Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the 「Urban and Residential Environment Improvement Act」, traditionally, ‘one household multi-owner’ would grant individual distribution qualifications when future household division and transfer to another household occur. Numerous nationwide urban regeneration project associations have granted distribution qualifications based on this criterion. This standard had become customary. However, in June 2023, the Supreme Court ruled that “the overlap application of Article 19, Paragraph 1, Subparagraphs 2 and 3 of the former Urban Improvement Act should principally view one person representing all the distribution qualification as an association member.” This ruling presented an interpretation different from the customary distribution qualifications of members. This is expected to cause direct conflicts in numerous improvement project sites. According to the recent interpretation of the Supreme Court’s ruling, going forward, ‘one household multi-ownership’ situations should be interpreted as a single distribution qualification, without independent distribution qualifications. This situation can be perceived as an unforeseen calamity for the individual who has purchased the said the property. This is because the normal right has changed to a so-called “No rights”. However, the ‘one household multi-ownership’ have been trading under the impression that an distribution qualification would be granted. The responsibility is not clear due to the Supreme Court’s decision. Ultimately, this could lead to a risk of passing the responsibility, lawsuits for refunds, and in the worst case, passing the bomb to an unsuspecting third party. Thus, following the recent Supreme Court’s decision on the one household multi-ownership, solutions are needed to prevent victims. Specific solutions can include 1. ‘Changes in family relationships such as divorce and separation of household’, 2. ‘Judgment before and after management disposal’, 3. ‘Cancellation due to error’, 4. ‘Review of the legal responsibility of a certified real estate agent’. In addition, to prevent further damage and provide remedies, ‘aggressive promotion of the revised criteria’ and ‘recovery through legislative amendments’ are required from the government’s policy review. Particularly, there is currently no discussion on the changed interpretation of the distribution qualification system. In this context, the significance of this study is in academically understanding the problems, proposing specific countermeasures to prevent harm to innocent citizens, and providing basic data for policy exploration regarding amendments to the Urban Redevelopment Law.