도심재개발에서 세입자의 사용·수익 중지와 변상금 부과처분 - 세운재정비촉진지구 6-3-4구역 사례를 중심으로

Abstract

In an urban redevelopment project under the Act on the Improvement of Urban and Residential Environments, a redevelopment tenant is to be evicted at an earlier time than in the case of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land for Public Works Projects due to the effect of the provision for the suspension of the tenant occupancy of the premises. Under the Constitution, the suspension of the tenant occupancy, in itself, constitutes the expropriation of property rights that requires just compensation. This article particularly focuses on the legal relationship surrounding the compensation issue for the commercial tenants, which had received relatively little attention compared to the compensation issue for the residential tenants until it became prominent after the Yongsan disaster in 2009. As a result of the incident, the Act on the Improvement of Urban and Residential Environments introduced the provision on the right to claim compensation for losses as one of the exceptions to the suspension of tenant occupancy. In operating the above system, the question of how to deal with the triangular legal relationship in which the project operator is added to that of the existing lease contract often arises. Since the law does not stipulate this issue meticulously, there seems to be confusion in practice with regard to the issue of determining the scope of redevelopment tenants who can claim compensation for losses. This article focuses on the purpose and significance of introducing the provisions related to redevelopment tenants' right to claim compensation for losses and its function as a right of defense against the eviction claim. It concludes that at least a redevelopment tenant who held a valid right to claim compensation for losses at the time of the announcement of approval of the project implementation plan can still challenge the eviction claim by the right even if the lease period expires before the announcement of approval of the management and disposal plan. In addition, although the former landlord can still exercise the eviction claim derived from the ownership, the redevelopment tenant should be allowed to challenge the landlord’s claim by a right to claim compensation for losses against the project operator. On the other hand, if the local government, which is the permitting authority for the redevelopment project, also holds the status of the owner of premises within the project area and at the same time holds the status of lessor of the premises through a government lease contract, the permitting authority should be construed to hold the status equivalent to a project operator, not a mere landowner. Therefore, the redevelopment tenant, who is the lessee under the government lease contract, should be allowed to defense himself/herself against the permitting authority as long as he/she has the right to claim compensation for losses against the project operator, and the permitting authority may not impose an administrative penalty on the redevelopment tenant as a separate means of administrative enforcement to evict the redevelopment tenant.