재건축결의 변경을 위한 의결정족수 및 서면결의의 유효성

Abstract This study examines the legal issues surrounding the fundamental changes in reconstruction resolutions and the validity of written resolutions as a means of decision-making. As conflicts arising from rapid increases in construction costs intensify, the voting quorum and procedural legitimacy required for modifying initial resolutions have become critical factors for the success of reconstruction projects. The research findings indicate that South Korean Supreme Court precedents protect the property rights of minority owners by requiring an increased quorum—4/5 under the "Act on Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings" and 2/3 under the "Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments"—for 'fundamental changes' that essentially alter the cost-sharing structure. In addition, the written resolution to secure such a quorum must, above all, reflect the true intention of the members. For this, it was confirmed that the specificity of information provision must be secured, and the deadline for exercising the right to withdraw to confirm the owner's true intention should also be widely guaranteed before the resolution is established (= before voting begins). The reconstruction project is a process that goes beyond the physical regeneration of the city and determines the economic fate of numerous stakeholders. The law of decision quorum and written resolution covered in this study is the point where the law's ideology of majority efficiency and minority protection most fiercely conflict. In the future, it is expected that a rational decision-making system will be established that can simultaneously secure procedural justification and project momentum in line with changing economic conditions.