도시재생사업의 사유지 취득방식 개선 필요성에 대한 사업참여자 인식분석

Abstract

This study investigated the need to improve the operation of the current system and the perception of project participants related to the purchase of private land under the Special Act on the Revitalization of Urban Regeneration. After analyzing the problems of the current system, the purpose of the paper is to improve the method of acquiring private land that can be felt by actual residents and speed according to individual situations. For this purpose, the current system related to private land purchase, such as consultation purchase system and public expropriation system, was compared and analyzed. Second, problems with the operation of the private land purchase system under the Special Act on the Promotion of Urban Regeneration were analyzed based on the data shown in the media reports. In addition, the government investigated the actual conditions of local governments that forcibly acquired private property through the notice of public announcement. Based on this, problems related to the impossibility of prior consultation, problems related to the guarantee of property rights, and insufficient effects of urban renewal New Deal projects were classified. Next, experts, including public officials and university professors, were surveyed and analyzed whether or not urban regeneration projects were public and efficient under the Special Act on the Promotion of Urban Regeneration. The analysis results are as follows. It was analyzed that urban regeneration projects have a public nature under the Special Act on Urban Regeneration. Efficiency aspects include: The public expropriation system can solve the problems of acquisition in both factual and legal terms compared to the consultation purchase system, and can protect the property rights of owners and tenants more significantly. It was also analyzed that it could increase location adequacy and stabilize the current real estate market, contribute much to urban regeneration projects in the future, and reduce project cost and business period. In sum, there is efficiency and publicness is recognized. Based on the analysis, it is argued that: First, both consensual purchase and public acceptance methods are used. Second, in principle, the agreed purchase method is used, and as an exception, the common acceptance method is used. Third, they argue for the improvement of the system of partial acceptance when using the public acceptance method. To this end, it is deemed necessary to conduct in-depth research on the readjustment of the legal system and the exclusion of development profits.