도시개발법제의 회고와 규제혁신방안 - 시행자가 조합이고 환지방식의 사업시행방식을 중심으로 -

The scope of the study concerning this theme focuses on the implementers being associations and project implementation methods through replotting methods. In order to further empirically study the history of the statutes, such as the Land Compartmentalization and Rearrangement Act and the Urban Development Act, from the legislative retrospectives, the study examined the history of land compartmentalization and rearrangement projects mainly in Seoul and the current status of urban development projects in Korea. During the period of the 5th Five-Year Economic Development Plan (1962 through 1986) in Seoul, the land compartmentalization and rearrangement projects were the major tool for formation of urban districts. But as time passed by, the land burden ratio of land owners increased, which led to expansion of Seoul together with the birth of new urban development projects, namely the housing site development projects in Seoul metropolitan areas. With limitations of the housing site development projects, the Urban Development Act was enacted in 2000, and as this Act was implemented adjacent to existing urban districts, 3 implementation methods are being engaged in, including replotting methods, expropriation methods and mixed methods. The first of regulatory innovation measures concerns restitution of development gains. While the replotting methods from project implementation methods reflect the development gains, it has consistently addressed such issues through land burden ratio or average burden ratio ever since the enactment of the Land Compartmentalization and Rearrangement Act. The expropriation method adopted upon enactment of the Urban Development Act may cause disputes surrounding equity with the replotting methods because of the compensation for expropriation by excluding development gains from native residents, which brings questions regarding the effectiveness of expropriation methods as a project implementation method. While the standards have been the focal issue with regard to gratuitous reversion of public facilities, this study examined whether the above needs to be viewed as development costs or restitution of development gains. In addition, the study examined legal principles concerning compensation for unauthorized building structures. Especially, the original intent of legislations was for the average burden ratio to prevent excessive decrease as a concept of land burden ratio for the purpose of protecting the interest of land owners, and may be increased if a designating authority demands an implementer for excessive new development of public facilities. And in cases of the region with relatively low value of rights (green areas), it may function as regulatory factor for urban development projects with replotting methods implemented by associations. Legislative improvements are required for these regulations.