중앙분쟁조정위원회 분쟁조정제도의 문제점과 개선방안 -매립지 등 신규 토지의 귀속 지방자치단체결정의 문제점을 중심으로 -

Abstract

Since the introduction of the local autonomy system, conflicts and disputes have arisen among local governments in various fields such as ownership of shared properties, jurisdictional boundaries, installation of undesirable facilities, and environmental issues crossing boundaries. These disputes can be attributed to a lack of efforts to build consensus due to regional selfishness, inadequate government support systems, a lack of proactive resolve from higher local governments, insufficient interest from the general population, and the influence of public opinion formed by specific interest groups. Particularly, jurisdictional decisions for new lands, such as the Saemangeum reclaimed land, can escalate into severe conflicts among local governments, becoming broader social issues. Therefore, early resolution and peaceful settlement of these disputes are necessary to prevent unnecessary and exhausting conflicts. To address this, the Korean government established the Central Dispute Mediation Committee under the Ministry of the Interior and Safety through the Local Autonomy Act, providing a legal basis for resolving such disputes. However, various issues have arisen during the implementation process. This paper examines the general problems of the Central Dispute Mediation Committee and analyzes specific issues highlighted through major cases of jurisdictional disputes over reclaimed lands created by large-scale reclamation projects like the Saemangeum development. Furthermore, it aims to propose institutional improvement plans for effective dispute resolution, thereby preventing unnecessary conflicts among local governments and positively impacting regional and national development. The Central Dispute Mediation Committee has resolved various disputes so far. However, problems such as the lack of independence of the committee, insufficient expertise, overly broad scope of disputes, and lack of procedures for appealing decisions have been raised. To address these issues, the paper proposes enhancing the committee's independence, securing expertise, clarifying the scope of disputes, and legislating methods for appealing decisions. In particular, regarding the jurisdictional criteria for new lands like the Saemangeum reclamation project, the historical aspect including the ‘maritime boundary’ should be considered. For large-scale national projects, it is also crucial to ensure regulatory consistency and uniformity from the perspective of incoming businesses, and sufficiently reflect the opinions of related local governments and residents to protect the essence of local autonomy. Therefore, when determining the jurisdiction of reclaimed lands, the project's uniqueness and policy decisions should be considered as part of the criteria for efficient land use. Furthermore, establishing a system that allows for proactive mediation and arbitration by higher local governments in the process of deciding the jurisdiction of new lands is necessary to preserve the original intent of local autonomy.