일본의 소유자불명 부동산 관련 법제 동향과 법적 과제

This study analyzes the issue of unidentified property ownership in Japan and its related legal trends, aiming to derive implications for South Korea. The problem of unidentified property ownership in Japan has emerged as a result of the interaction of complex socioeconomic factors, including demographic changes, economic stagnation, and shifting urbanization patterns. In particular, rapid population decline and super-aging have fundamentally altered property ownership and management structures, affecting a wide range of areas including local government finances, urban landscapes, the environment, and food security. In response, the Japanese government has pursued comprehensive legal reforms, including the Act on Promotion of Smooth Use of Unidentified Land, amendments to the Basic Act on Land, revisions to the Civil Code and Real Estate Registration Act, the Act on Special Measures for Promotion of Dealing with Vacant Houses, and the Act on Attribution of Inherited Land to the National Treasury. This series of legal improvements reflects efforts to recognize and address the multifaceted nature of the problem. South Korea is also likely to face similar challenges due to rapid aging and population decline. As of 2022, there were about 132,000 vacant houses nationwide, and it is predicted that 13% (3.24 million) of all houses will be ownerless by 2050, indicating the growing severity of the problem. Based on Japan’s experience, this study examines key issues and legal challenges. First, the land use rights system for the efficient utilization of ownerless land faces legal limitations, including conflicts with the principle of statutory real rights, ambiguity regarding the nature of such rights, and insufficient remedies for owners. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the legal character of such rights and to strengthen compensation and remedial procedures. Second, the system for acquiring the shares of missing co-owners and transferring them to third parties can supplement the limitations of existing absentee property and inheritance property management systems, serving as a practical solution for the management and disposition of co-owned real estate. Third, Japan’s mandatory inheritance registration system suggests the need for a phased introduction of similar provisions in the Real Estate Registration Act in Korea, going beyond temporary laws, along with enhanced practical convenience through simplified reporting procedures and digitalization. Fourth, to fundamentally resolve the issue of multiple ownership, the introduction of innovative legal systems—such as public and social land banks, community land trusts, simplified ownership abandonment systems, digital land management systems, and special zone systems—is required. Fifth, to address the underutilization of the inheritance renunciation system due to procedural complexity and lack of information, accessibility should be improved through procedural simplification and the introduction of online systems. Sixth, while the management order system presupposes a conflict between private property rights and public welfare, it contributes to reducing the social costs of neglected land. Thus, institutional control through strict court review and clear standards for authority and responsibility is essential. This study proposes legal and institutional directions for resolving issues related to ownerless land and co-owned real estate, aiming to contribute to balancing public welfare and property rights protection.