비농업인의 농지소유에 관한 비판적 고찰

Abstract

Food security is one of the country's important policies and cannot be abandoned at any cost. Farmland is a means of producing agricultural products that are essential to achieving food security. Conservation of farmland should not be limited to securing a certain scale of farmland, but it should be able to function as an agricultural production element. Farmland should not only be suitable for the ecological aspect of production of agricultural products but also be able to generate profits by being put into agricultural production by maintaining low prices like French farmland. In this respect, Article 3 of the Agricultural Land Act declares that "farmland should be owned and used in the direction of enhancing agricultural productivity and not subject to speculation."Nevertheless, Article 6, Paragraph 2 of the Farmland Act, violates Article 121 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea and Article 11 (1) of the Farmland Act by broadly acknowledging the exceptions for the farmers’ possessions of the farmland. Many of the constitutional documents ignore the phenomenon of destroying the Constitution by law and argued that the principle of land to the tiller should be dismissed based on the fact that the principle of land to the filler is virtually abolished only by the result. These claims are not convincing if we look at the case of Taiwan, the world's first to discard the principle of land to the tiller. Some particular cases of harming the principle of livelihoods are the case of the possession of agricultural land by heirs who are non-farmers, immigrant workers, agricultural corporations, and excessively acknowledging the possession for the purpose of weekend farm. Especially in recent years, farmland is being widely used by agricultural corporations by easing the requirements of agricultural corporations so that non - farmers can actually own farmland. The Constitution, in conjunction with the public domain of land, should be able to practice dispose of farmland owned by non-farmers so that the principle of land to the tiller can ultimately be achieved, but in order to prevent the confusion caused by rapid policy change, we expect to be able to accomplish the desired purpose indirectly through the expansion of taxes, maximum limitation of the rent, and subsidy.