매도청구권제도의 위헌성에 관한 소고
A Short study about Unconstitutionality of Selling Claims Right
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In executing the real estate development project, it is a very important element to secure the project site in an optimal period and method as well as make a feasibility study with a focus on cost-benefit analysis. In this connection, the current legal system adopts the land expropriation method and sale request method as the compulsory means for securing the project site according to the type, nature and public nature of the development project, and the typical project of the sale request method is the housing rebuilding project. Private businessmen have the right of selling claims legitimately for acquiring the partial land that they didn’t acquire during constructing houses. But because of taking a long time and not so being helpful in exercising the right of selling claims to acquire the partial land, private businessmen may not exercise this right or understand it unnecessarily, which becomes the matter of effectiveness of the selling claims that is permitted for the purpose of public needs. Housing construction has public interests and implements the principle of public utilities stipulated by law as much as the individual ownership of the land has to be changed forcibly. The reason for permitting selling claims to the private businessmen is that besides this public interests, if housing site prices were paid excessively high, housing prices would rise as much, and therefore it is intended to restrain this appearance by paying fair prices. Though the right of selling claims by the housing construction is belong to the private law, its exercise procedure is very similar to the expropriation claims under the public law. Therefore, as long as housing construction is admitted to public utilities, it must be done smoothly by giving the expropriation claims to the private businessmen according to changing the current system. But after private businessmen have bought more than 80% of the necessary housing land, the expropriation claims might be given to them only to acquire the rest land.
Abstract
In executing the real estate development project, it is a very important element to secure the project site in an optimal period and method as well as make a feasibility study with a focus on cost-benefit analysis. In this connection, the current legal system adopts the land expropriation method and sale request method as the compulsory means for securing the project site according to the type, nature and public nature of the development project, and the typical project of the sale request method is the housing rebuilding project. Private businessmen have the right of selling claims legitimately for acquiring the partial land that they didn’t acquire during constructing houses. But because of taking a long time and not so being helpful in exercising the right of selling claims to acquire the partial land, private businessmen may not exercise this right or understand it unnecessarily, which becomes the matter of effectiveness of the selling claims that is permitted for the purpose of public needs. Housing construction has public interests and implements the principle of public utilities stipulated by law as much as the individual ownership of the land has to be changed forcibly. The reason for permitting selling claims to the private businessmen is that besides this public interests, if housing site prices were paid excessively high, housing prices would rise as much, and therefore it is intended to restrain this appearance by paying fair prices. Though the right of selling claims by the housing construction is belong to the private law, its exercise procedure is very similar to the expropriation claims under the public law. Therefore, as long as housing construction is admitted to public utilities, it must be done smoothly by giving the expropriation claims to the private businessmen according to changing the current system. But after private businessmen have bought more than 80% of the necessary housing land, the expropriation claims might be given to them only to acquire the rest land.
참고문헌 (16)
- 권남혁, "재건축과 관련한 몇 가지 문제 특히 재건축결의 및 매도청구권과 관련하여, 민사재판의 제문제 11권, In 변재승선생, 권광중선생 화갑기념", pp.785~786 (2002), 민사실무연구회
- 송본구, "‘매도청구 권의 행사, In 재판실무대계 제19집", pp.494~ (1992), 청림서원
- 김태석, "주택재건축사업에서의 매도청구권에 관한 소고, In 토지법의 이론과 실무, 지암 이선영 박사 화갑기념논문집", pp.32~ (2006), 법원사
- 김종보, "새로운 재건축・재개발 이야기", 도시개발 연구포럼, pp.664~ (2010)
- 송현진, "재개발.재건축 이론과 실무", pp.416~ (2010), 법률출판사
- "헌법재판소 전원재판부 2006. 7. 27. 선고 2003헌바18 결정", ~
- 이상용, "도시 및 주거환경정비법상의 매도청구권", 경기법조, (15), pp.8~ (2008)
- 이선영, "주택법상 민간사업주체의 매도청구권 법리", 건국대학교 부동산 도시연구, 2(2), pp.3~ (2010)
- 김현성, "도시재건축의 법적 쟁점에 관하여’(재건축결의와 매도청구권을 중심으로", 민.형사실무연구, (12), pp.237~238 (2004), 서울북부지방법원
- 김연태, "공용수용의 요건으로서의 ‘공공필요’", 고려법학, (48), pp.83~105 (2007), 법학연구원
- 김남진, "행정법의 기본문제", pp.465~, 법문사
- 석종현, "민간기업에의 토지수용권 부여에 대한 타당성 검토", 연구논단, 23(23), pp.9~ (2005), 한국감정평가협회
- 김성수, "일반행정법", pp.641~ (2008), 홍문사
- "Ossenbühl, Staatshaftungsrecht, S. 205", 205~
- 허영, "한국 헌법론", pp.470~ (2010), 박영사
- "헌재 1998. 12. 24. 선고 89헌마214 결정", ~ (1998)
