젠트리피케이션 현상의 토지공법적 접근과 개선방안

Abstract This study defined gentrification as a phenomenon in which existing residents and small merchants are involuntarily expelled due to soaring land and building values and rents in the process of urban redevelopment, urban regeneration, commercial revitalization, and smart city development, and analyzed it as a public law phenomenon accompanied by public authority planning and licensing systems, not a simple market phenomenon. Gentrification is directly related to the constitutional guarantee of property rights, freedom of residence transfer, the right to live a human life, equal rights and social-state principles, and if the development administration results in infringement of the housing and business base of the socially underprivileged in the process of realizing the public interest, the standards and limitations of public interest judgment are problematic. However, the current land construction system focuses on land use efficiency, urban competitiveness, and physical environment improvement, making it easy to formalize public interest screening, and the protection of tenants and commercial tenants has limitations that are divided into individual contractual relationships or post-reward compensation under the Lease Protection Act. In addition, as the participation of living-based stakeholders in planning decisions such as maintenance plans and district unit plans is not substantially guaranteed, procedural legitimacy and acceptability of results are weakened. Therefore, this study put the core of the gentrification response on 'resettlement' rather than 'compensation', and suggested land public law improvement measures. First, it is necessary to legislate a win-win zone system that encompasses commercial and residential areas to stabilize rent by district and to institutionalize long-term public (quasi-public) rental space. Second, public rental housing and public rental shops should be combined to support residential and commercial resettlement in an integrated manner, and the financial structure should be designed so that development profits generated from maintenance projects are returned to the region. Third, by establishing a public interest resettlement support system in the Urban Reorganization Act, it is necessary to ensure effectiveness by examining the appropriateness of the resettlement plan, performance inspection, and conditioning authorization. Fourth, a resident participatory planning system should be established to ensure that opinions are reviewed and returned rather than "received" and institutionalized so that stakeholders can participate from the initial agenda-setting stage. Fifth, the social sustainability evaluation system should be introduced as a legal procedure so that social indicators such as indigenous resettlement rate, small business maintenance rate, and community maintenance are reflected in the licensing judgment. Sixth, in smart city development, it is necessary to prevent the risk of digital gentrification by introducing digital inclusion evaluation and socio-economic impact analysis. Finally, it was proposed to introduce the principle of fair development as a high-level norm that penetrates these improvements to establish a standard for comprehensively examining the legitimacy of development according to public interest, equity, participation, and sustainability.