정당보상의 사례에 관한 연구 = A Study on the Cases of Just Compensation

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of redevelopment work is to recover the function of city, to maintain the living environment, to promote the public welfare and to ensure the property right at optimum level. In order to achieve these purposes, however, just compensation clearly stated under the Article 23, clause 3 of the constitutional law needs to be fulfilled for the private properties taken by the government for public utilities in the redevelopment areas as a prior condition.
Accordingly, the redevelopment work, not premised by the just compensation, would only exact the sacrifice from the private owners whose properties are taken by the government in the project area, and, as a result, it would not be able to achieve its very first purposes.
This study first summarizes the latest case 'Yongsan Fourth Area Redevelopment Project' and surveys the cause of 'Yongsan tragedy' happened on 2009. Jan. 20. to examine the actual compensation matters accompanied by the expropriation, and then attempts to present any possible plan or resolution of executing the just compensation for the private owners whose properties are taken for the redevelopment project by reviewing the compensation provisions of other countries, the U.S., Germany, and Japan.
It seems to be obvious that the countries considered in this study all recognize the necessity of just compensation when taking the private properties and of reflecting a proper market value in computing the just compensation. Yet, the provisions and cases examined in this study were not still enough to provide the standard of just compensation because some cases showed different judgements on the recognition of the just compensation or the limitation of private property.
Although presenting the standard of just compensation was not possible in this study, this study understands that, for the execution of just compensation, the social factor and circumstance, the type of property taken by the government, the limitation of property right, etc. need to be considered in estimating the just compensation according to each individual case, and, the institutional improvement or political plan such as the reformation of appraisal system, the improvement of selecting the appraiser, the city maintenance fund, etc. need to be performed for covering the losses such as investment cost or rental premium which cannot be covered by the compensation provisions.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 유해웅, "토지공법론" 삼영사 2008

2 변창흠, "토지개발사업의 공공성 평가와 공공부문의 역할" 한국토지공법학회 38 : 555-576, 2007

3 엄수원, "토지개발사업에 따른 재산권 제한과 손실보상에 관한 연구" 한국토지공법학회 26 : 121-147, 2005

4 박철완, "주택 재개발 사업시 재정착률 제고를 위한 법·제도적 방안 연구 - 부산시를 중심으로 -" 한국토지공법학회 42 : 291-321, 2008

5 成鮮濟, "정당한 보상 - 미국의 경험을 중심으로 -" 한국토지공법학회 19 : 8-228, 2003

6 이헌석, "정당보상으로서 채권보상의 실효성 제고방안" 한국토지공법학회 38 : 123-141, 2007

7 유정식, "손실보상의 경제학" 한국토지공법학회 19 : 1-54, 2003

8 성중탁, "손실보상 요건으로서 공용침해와 사회적 구속성의 구별" (3672) : 2008

9 성중탁, "손실보상 요건으로서 공용침해와 사회적 구속성의 구별" 2008

10 대법원, "선고 2006다79896 판결"

11 대법원, "선고 2004두5621 판결"

12 대법원, "선고 2003두858 판결"

13 대법원, "선고 2003두14703 판결"

14 대법원, "선고 2003두13106 판결"

15 대법원, "선고 2000다59050 판결"

16 김동건, "미국의 Regulatory Takings의 연구" 한국토지공법학회 19 : 11-302, 2003

17 이동찬, "미국에서의 공적사용의 변화에 따른 판례의 동향" 한국토지공법학회 39 : 391-410, 2008

18 강현호, "독일에 있어서 도시개발을 위한 토지확보와 보상" 한국토지공법학회 30 : 197-220, 2006

19 김연태, "공용수용의 요건으로서의 ‘공공필요’" 법학연구원 (48) : 83-105, 2007

20 "自作農創設特別措置法による土地買収の対価に対する不服"

21 김창휘, "美國의 損失補償基準에 關한 硏究 - Relocation Act를 中心으로 -" 한국토지공법학회 26 : 149-177, 2005

22 "最高裁判所 農地買収に対する不服申立"

23 "最高裁判所 宅地買収計画取消請求"

24 "最高裁判所 土地収用補償金請求事件"

25 "所有權取得無効確認"

26 "U.S. v. Toronto. Hamilton & Buffalo Navigation Co. 338 U.S. 396"

27 "U.S. v. Toronto, Hamilton & Buffalo Nav. Co. 338 U.S. 396"

28 "U.S. v. 564.54 Acres of Land, 441 U.S. 506"

29 "U.S. v. 564.54 Acres of Land(Lutheran Synod) 441 U.S. 506"

30 "Kelo v. City of New London, Conn. 543 U.S. 1135"

31 "County of Wayne v. Hathcock 684 N.W.2d 765"

32 "City of Norwood v. Horney 853 N.E.2d 1115"

33 "Almota Farmers Elevator v. U.S. 405 U.S. 1039"