사물주소 부여대상 확대 방안 연구

Abstract

There There is a difference in terms of administrative power in that the address of things are not an address under Public Act. In terms of location expression, it is possible to express the location more flexibly and in more detail than the road name address, so it should be improved so that it can be assigned and managed in an appropriate location, so that the location of the entire territory can be expressed together with the road name address. As a result of the comparison between the road name address and the address of things based on the analysis results of related laws such as the existing Road Name Address Act, the Building Act, and the Regulations on the Preparation and Management of Basic Address Information, it was confirmed that there are fundamental limitations of the address of things system. Accordingly, this study attempted to suggest ways to improve the address of thing system by broadly dividing it into the legal aspect and the addressable object aspect. From the legal point of view, firstly, it is necessary to improve the upper and lower level laws by unification together with a clear definition of the term subject of addressable object; secondly, according to the Building Act, facilities that are not used for residence among buildings must be given an address of thing; and thirdly, it is necessary to make it easy to use and link with heterogeneous public data by classifying the registration items of the basic address information map by type of geographical feature to be assigned an address. From the point of view of addressability, firstly, it must be given to all facilities in the relevant category so that it can be recognised that all specific facilities have object addresses, and secondly, it is necessary to be able to address the address of things to places that are used by many, even if there are no facilities.