도시개발사업 토지소유자의 환지만족도에 관한 연구 : 김해시 내덕지구를 중심으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

About 64% of the country's land area is mountainous and the actual land available for real life is only 36% of the land area in Korea. In Korea, there was the birth of a baby boom generation whose explosive population
increased after 6.25 korean war, and when the birth of the baby boomers grew into a producible population at that time, the economy grew dramatically with the government-led industrialization economic development
plan. The success of industrialization has increased the people 's income and the awareness of housing has gradually changed in proportion to the increased income. As the economy grew, the lack of land for economic
growth had become a serious social problem.
In order to solve the shortage of land, the urban development project is being carried out in the Kimhae City Urban Development Project Nduk District, and the researcher acquires the land in the business district before or after the project is conducted in the district, From September 20, 2018, we have started to study the satisfaction of the landowners who received the land. This study was a good opportunity to glean the experiences and opinions of the business owners of Gimhae - dong Deokdong district. The urban development project currently being implemented by the private sector is summarized as follows.
First, the occupants of Daedeok district urban development project occupy more than 50 families by age and occupied the self - employed by occupation. The amount of assets is less than 1 billion, accounting for more
than half of all landowners, annual income is between 2,000 ~ 80 million won, 70% of respondents, and knowledge about urban development projects is "normal" and "lack" %, Respectively.
Secondly, the ratio of landowners who have already made their objections before the project is 38.6% versus 61.4%. Those who opposed the project before the start of the development project were most likely to be
"discontinued during the development project", followed by "lack of understanding about the project". 65% of the 194 people in favor of the project before the start of the project approved the project mainly for "the
value of the development as a result of the development".
Third, the reason for purchasing the land in the Neduk area in the empirical analysis of the overall satisfaction of the overall business after the designation was determined was "investment", which accounted for more than 80% of the total survey respondents, and "farming" For the purposes of this study, the percentage of purchasing land (agricultural land prior to development) was 0%. At the time of purchasing the land, Gimhae had the most residence, followed by Busan and Changwon. About 60% of respondents said that they would "sell off" the future use of Hangzhou, and the next response was that they would "build" on their own. The percentage of respondents who answered "dissatisfied" and "average" for the work of unions and contractors exceeded 80% of the respondents. As for the current tax system, "very dissatisfied" and "dissatisfied" exceeded 70% of the total response due to the development benefits (such as the reduction of capital income tax rate).
Fourth, respondents who selected "Normal" were the most satisfied respondents in terms of location, direction, size, coverage ratio, volume ratio, usage area, and harmony with neighboring areas. However, the percentage of "very dissatisfied" and "dissatisfied" was about 70% in the response to the questionnaire. It seems that the landowners are strongly opposed to the survey because they think that the size of the returned land is small even though they have already paid a lot of land for infrastructure and cevicage.
Fifth, the overall process and process of the project, the support of the local government (such as the implementation of the expansion of the road at the time of the development project), the size of the infrastructure site (school, park road, etc.) The degree of satisfaction with the questionnaire about the expected return on investment, etc., was higher than that of "normal" or "dissatisfied". In addition, the negative responses of "very dissatisfied" and "dissatisfied" were very clear in the question about the limit
of the number of households (maximum 4 households allowed) in the residential area for one day and the construction of the apartment for rent in the residential area.
The empirical analysis of this study suggests that the opinions of the owner of the firm can be changed at any time and for any reason. It is a fact revealed in the survey, but the owner of the project was most worried
that the development project was stuck and the construction was stopped during the project. It is also necessary to revise and supplement the tax system and local government support policies related to urban development projects. As revealed by the survey results, the landowner has shown considerable dissatisfaction with the current tax and municipal support. The reason for this is that the development project has already given us a lot of land due to the burden of the infrastructure and the cevicage, but if we try to sell the remaining land after leaving a little profit at the completion of the construction, There was no other way.
It is necessary to readjust the guidelines for the land-use rate. According to the results of the survey, the degree of complaints about the rate of deterrence was very worrisome, especially in the details of satisfaction of the lotus owner. Therefore, it is necessary to readjust the rate of gauging that can be understood and understood by the owner of the lot within the current legal framework. It is necessary to alleviate the burden on the infrastructure land to be borne by the landowner. In order to realize the original purpose of the Urban Development Project, it is necessary to prepare a bill that relaxes the burden of the current infrastructure site given to the owner of the land and obligates the relevant municipalities to cover all or part of the infrastructure.
The contractor should hurry to take measures to shorten the construction period as much as possible. As we have already seen in the previous survey results, before the start of the project, we were in favor of the development project. However, one of the biggest reasons why we turned away from the view point was the "prolonged development period". Therefore, it is considered that the construction company needs to review the construction measures to reduce the construction period as soon as possible.to the results of the survey, the degree of complaints about the rate of deterrence was very worrisome, especially in the details of satisfaction of the lotus owner. Therefore, it is necessary to readjust the rate of gauging that can be understood and understood by the owner of the lot within the current legal framework.
Fourth, it is necessary to mitigate the burden on the infrastructure land to be borne by the landowner. In order to realize the original purpose of the Urban Development Project, it is necessary to prepare a bill that relaxes the burden of the current infrastructure site given to the owner of the land and obligates the relevant municipalities to cover all or part of the infrastructure.
Fifth, contractors should hurry to take measures to shorten construction period as much as possible. As we have already seen in the previous survey results, before the start of the project, we were in favor of the development project. However, one of the biggest reasons why we turned away from the view point was the "prolonged development period". Therefore, it is considered that the construction company needs to review the construction measures to reduce the construction period as soon as possible.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

국토면적의 약 64%가 산지이고 당장 실생활에 활용 가능한 토지는 국토면적의 36%에 불과한 우리나라의 가용 토지 현실은 한마디로 말해 열악하다. 그리고 우리나라는 6.25사변 후 인구가 폭발적으로 증가한 이른바 베이비붐 세대의 출생이 있었으며 이 시기의 출생자가 생산 가능한 인구로 성장하였을 무렵 정부 주도의 산업화 경제개발계획 시기와 맞물려 경제도 비약적인 성장을 이루었다. 산업화의 성공으로 국민들의 소득은 증가하였으며 증가한 소득에 비례하여 주거에 대한 의식도 차츰 변하였다. 경제가 성장할수록 그 경제성장의 밑바닥에 터 잡아야 할 대지는 부족하였으며 이러한 대지의 부족현상은 더욱더 심각한 사회문제로 부상하였다.
부족한 대지를 해결하기 위한 한 가지 방법으로 전국적으로 많은 곳에서 도시개발사업이 이루어졌으며 김해시 내덕지구도 그 중의 한곳이었다. 본 연구에서는 2018년 9월 20일부터 이 지구에서 사업이 진행되기 전후 시점에 토지를 취득하고 최종적으로 환지를 받은 토지소유자를 대상으로 환지만족도를 파악하고자 하였다. 그리하여 김해시 내덕지구 토지소유자를 대상으로 설문조사를 진행하였는데 수집한 자료는 사업에 대한 진솔한 경험과 의견을 접할 수 있는 좋은 기회였다. 민간에 의하여 현재 원지환지방식으로 시행중인 도시개발사업 김해시 내덕지구 토지소유자의 환지만족도에 관한 연구를 요약하면 다음과 같다.
첫째, 내덕지구 도시개발사업의 토지소유자는 연령별로는 50대 이상, 직종별로는 자영업에 종사하는 비중이 가장 많았다. 자산규모는 10억 이하가 전체 토지소유자의 절반 이상을 차지하였으며 연 소득은 2,000~8,000만 원 사이가 전체 응답자의 70%정도였다. 토지소유자 스스로가 생각하는 도시개발사업에 대한 지식정도는 ‘보통’과 ‘부족’이 80% 이상을 차지하여 비교적 낮은 수준으로 파악되었다.
둘째, 환지방식으로 시행된 내덕지구 도시개발사업 자체에 대하여 사업시행 전에 이미 반대의사를 분명히 한 토지소유자와 그렇지 않은 토지소유자는 38.6% 대 61.4%의 비율로 나타났다. 개발사업 시작 전 사업에 반대한 가장 뚜렷한 이유는 ‘개발사업 중 사업 중단 가능성’으로 나타났으며, 다음으로 ‘사업에 대한 이해 부족’으로 나타났다. 그리고 사업시작 전 사업에 찬성한 자 194명 중 65%가 ‘개발로 환지의 가치가 증가’할 것을 주된 이유로 들어 사업을 찬성하였다.
셋째, 환지가 지정되고 난 후 사업전반에 대한 환지만족도 실증분석에서 내덕지구에 토지를 구매한 이유에 대해서는 ‘투자’라고 응답한 비율이 전체 조사대상자 316명 중 80%를 넘었으며 ‘영농’을 목적으로 토지(개발사업 이전의 농지)를 구매한 빈도는 찾아볼 수 없었다. 토지를 구매할 당시 토지소유자의 거주지는 김해시가 가장 많았으며 다음으로 부산시와 창원시 순으로 나타났다. 환지를 향후 어떤 목적으로 활용할 것인가에 대해서는 ‘매각’할 것이라는 응답이 60%에 달하였으며 자신의 환지에 ‘건축’을 할 것이라는 응답이 다음 순이었다. 조합과 시공사의 업무처리에 대해서는 ‘불만족’과 ‘보통’을 응답한 비율이 전체 응답자의 80%를 넘어섰고 개발로 인해 환지가치가 증가하고 이를 처분하였을 경우 세금 납부와 관련한 현재의 조세제도에 대해서는 ‘매우 불만족’과 ‘불만족’이 전체 응답의 70%를 넘어서서 대단히 강한 불만이 표출되었다.
넷째, 지정된 환지의 세부적인 항목 중 위치, 방향, 크기, 건폐율, 용적률, 용도지역, 인접지와의 조화 등에 만족하느냐의 설문에 대한 응답에서는 ‘보통’을 선택한 응답자가 가장 많은 것으로 나타났다. 그러나 감보율의 만족정도를 설문하는 응답에서는 ‘매우 불만족’과 ‘불만족’을 합한 비율이 70%에 달하였다. 이는 토지소유자 처지에서 보면 기반시설용지와 체비지 등의 조성을 위하여 이미 많은 토지를 부담하였으나 돌려받는 환지의 크기는 기대에 미치지 못할 만큼 작다고 생각하여 설문조사를 통하여 강하게 불만을 표출하는 것으로 보인다.
다섯째, 토지소유자를 대상으로 현재까지 경험한 사업의 전반적인 진행절차나 과정, 지방자치단체의 지원(개발사업과 맞물린 시점에 도로의 확장공사시행 등), 기반시설용지(학교, 공원 도로 등)의 크기, 환지에 건축하였을 경우 투자대비 예상 적정 수익률 등에 대하여 설문하였는데 만족정도로 ‘보통’ 또는 ‘불만족’을 응답한 비중높았다. 그리고 1종일반주거지역에 건축과 관련하여 가구 수의 제한(최대 4가구 허용)과 공동주택지에 임대아파트의 건설예정 등에 대한 설문에서는 ‘매우 불만족’과 ‘불만족’의 부정적인 응답이 아주 뚜렷하게 높게 나타났다.
실증분석 결과를 통하여 시사점을 제시하였는데 토지소유자는 개발사업에 대하여 찬․반 의견이 언제든지 변할 수 있다고 확인하였다. 설문조사에서 드러난 사실이지만 토지소유자는 개발사업이 차질을 빗어 사업 중에 공사가 중단되는 것을 가장 염려하였다. 그리고 토지소유자는 현재의 조세제도와 지방자치단체의 지원에 대하여 상당한 불만을 드러내었는데 도시개발사업과 관련한 조세제도와 지자체의 지원정책에 수정보완이 필요하다. 그 이유는 개발사업으로 기반시설과 체비지 등의 부담으로 많은 토지를 부담하였다고 생각하는데, 공사완료 시점에 약간의 차익을 남겨 환지를 매각하려고 하면 양도와 관련한 세금이 너무 부담스럽게 발목을 잡아 불만이 생겨날 수밖에 없는 사실을 설문조사를 통하여 파악하였기 때문이다.
또한 토지부담율의 가이드라인을 재조정할 필요가 있다. 설문조사 결과를 살펴보면 토지소유자가 생각하는 환지의 세부만족항목에서 특히 감보율에 대한 불만정도는 심히 우려할만한 수준이었다. 그러므로 현재의 법테두리 내에서 토지소유자자가 납득하고 공감할 수 있는 감보율 재조정이 필요하다. 아울러 토지소유자가 부담하여야 하는 기반시설부담 용지에 대해서도 그 부담 정도를 완화할 필요가 있다. 도시개발사업 본래의 취지를 살리려면 토지소유자에게 주어지는 현재의 기반시설용지의 부담을 완화하고 기반시설비용의 전부 또는 일부를 해당 지방자치단체에 강제로 부담케 하는 등 후속적인 법안 마련이 필요하다고 본다.
마지막으로 시공사는 공사기간을 최대한 단축할 수 있는 대책을 서둘러 마련해야한다. 토지소유자는 사업시작 전에 개발사업에 찬성하였으나 환지시점에서는 반대로 돌아선 가장 큰 이유가 ‘개발기간의 장기화 때문’이었는데 토지소유자는 개발기간의 장기화를 극도로 꺼리는 것으로 파악되었다. 그러므로 시공사는 토지지소유자의 이 러한 불안을 불식시키기 위하여 공사기간을 최대한 단축할 수 있는 시공대책마련을 서둘러 검토할 필요가 있다고 판단되며 이는 도시개발사업을 바라보는 시행사인 환지소유자의 심리적인 안정에도 상당한 도움이 될 것이라 생각된다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서론 ···································································································· 1
• 제1절 연구의 배경 및 목적 ························································································ 1
• 1. 연구의 배경 ········································································································ 1
• 2. 연구의 목적 ········································································································ 3
• 제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법과 구성 ··········································································· 4
• 1. 연구의 범위 ········································································································ 4
• 2. 연구의 방법과 구성 ···························································································· 5
• 제2장 도시개발사업과 환지방식에 대한 이론적 고찰 ································ 7
• 제1절 도시개발사업 ···································································································· 7
• 1. 도시개발사업의 정의 ·························································································· 7
• 2. 도시개발사업의 필요성 ····················································································· 10
• 3. 도시개발사업의 시행자 및 실시계획 ······························································· 14
• 제2절 도시개발사업의 법적 근거 및 연혁 ······························································ 16
• 1. 도시개발사업의 법적 근거 ··············································································· 16
• 2. 도시개발법제의 연혁 ························································································ 17
• 제3절 도시개발사업 환지방식 ·················································································· 19
• 1. 환지방식의 분류 ······························································································· 19
• 2. 환지방식의 추진절차 ························································································ 22
• 3. 환지계획의 작성 및 작성기준 ·········································································· 24
• 4. 환지예정지의 지정 및 환지처분 ······································································ 27
• 제4절 선행연구 고찰 ································································································· 28
• 1. 도시개발사업에 관한 선행연구 ········································································ 29
• 2. 환지방식에 관한 선행연구 ··············································································· 32
• 3. 선행연구와의 차별성 ························································································ 35
• 제3장 도시개발사업 및 환지방식에 관한 실태 및 사례분석 ··················· 37
• 제1절 도시개발사업 추진현황 ·················································································· 37
• 1. 환지방식 추진현황 ···························································································· 37
• 2. 환지방식 외 추진현황 ······················································································ 41
• 제2절 도시개발사업 환지방식 사례 ········································································· 46
• 1. 양산시 어곡지구 ······························································································· 46
• 2. 창원시 감계지구 ······························································································· 49
• 3. 김해시 풍유2지구 ······························································································ 51
• 4. 사례분석 소결 ··································································································· 53
• 제4장 토지소유자의 환지만족도 실증분석 ················································ 56
• 제1절 실증분석의 개요 ····························································································· 56
• 1. 실증분석 대상지역 ···························································································· 56
• 2. 설문조사의 목적 ······························································································· 56
• 3. 설문구성과 분석방법 ························································································ 57
• 제2절 설문조사에 따른 실증분석 ············································································· 59
• 1. 조사대상자의 일반적 특성 분석 ······································································ 59
• 2. 사업에 대한 찬․반 변화추이 분석 ································································· 63
• 3. 환지지정 후 일반적인 특성 분석 ···································································· 66
• 4. 사업완료 후 일반적 특성 분석 ········································································ 72
• 5. 환지 세부요인 만족도 분석 ············································································· 73
• 제3절 실증분석의 요약 및 시사점 ··········································································· 82
• 1. 실증분석의 요약 ······························································································· 82
• 2. 시사점 ················································································································ 84
• 제5장 결론 ··································································································· 87
• 1. 연구의 요약 ······································································································· 87
• 2. 향후 과제 ·········································································································· 88
• 참고문헌 ···················································································································· 89
• 부 록 ···················································································································· 92
• Abstract ··················································································································· 100