환매권 제한에 대한 법적 쟁점 -공익사업의 변환을 중심으로-
Legal Issues on Restriction of Repurchase Right - Focusing on the provisions of "Alteration of the Public Works" -
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper study legal issues on "Restriction of Repurchase Right" according to Article 91(6) of 「Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc, for Public Works and the Compensation therefor」(hereinafter "the Act"). The act has been admitted repurchase right. However, there are some restriction about the exercise of repurchase right. From the time of the introduction of this provisions sparked off a debate among the judiciary and legal scholars. In cases of the 96Hun-Ba94, June 26, 1997 and 2001Hun-Ba49, November 29, 2012, the Constitutional Court decided that Article 91(6) of the Act which admits the "Restriction of Repurchase Right" is constitutional. Nevertheless, even today, there is divided pro and con on the provisions of "Alteration of the Public Works". In this paper work to confirm the abuse of this provisions on the part of the government including excessive expropriation and alteration of the public works after expropriation due to voiding the repurchase right. Therefore, it is impossible toexercise complete repurchase right. In order to reduce the potential nefarious scheme by the State, local governments or public agencies in various public works, Article 91(6) of the Act which restricts of the repurchase right in the case of the "Alteration of the Public Works" for public needs should be revised. This is an effective way to ensure "the Continuance Guarantee of the Property Right".
Abstract
This paper study legal issues on "Restriction of Repurchase Right" according to Article 91(6) of 「Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc, for Public Works and the Compensation therefor」(hereinafter "the Act"). The act has been admitted repurchase right. However, there are some restriction about the exercise of repurchase right. From the time of the introduction of this provisions sparked off a debate among the judiciary and legal scholars. In cases of the 96Hun-Ba94, June 26, 1997 and 2001Hun-Ba49, November 29, 2012, the Constitutional Court decided that Article 91(6) of the Act which admits the "Restriction of Repurchase Right" is constitutional. Nevertheless, even today, there is divided pro and con on the provisions of "Alteration of the Public Works". In this paper work to confirm the abuse of this provisions on the part of the government including excessive expropriation and alteration of the public works after expropriation due to voiding the repurchase right. Therefore, it is impossible toexercise complete repurchase right. In order to reduce the potential nefarious scheme by the State, local governments or public agencies in various public works, Article 91(6) of the Act which restricts of the repurchase right in the case of the "Alteration of the Public Works" for public needs should be revised. This is an effective way to ensure "the Continuance Guarantee of the Property Right".
참고문헌 (20)
- 김연태, "행정법II (제15판)" (2011), 법문사
- 박균성, "행정법강의 제10판" (2013), 박영사
- 박윤흔, "최신행정법강의(하)" (2004), 박영사
- 박윤흔, "최신행정법강의(하)" (2009), 박영사
- 이병철, "행정법강의" (2008), 유스티아누스
- 이상규, "최신행정법론(하)" (1995), 법문사
- 장태주, "행정법개론" (2011), 법문사
- 홍정선, "행정법특강" (2013), 박영사
- 김시현, "환매권에 있어서의 공익사업의 변경", 판례연구, (8) (1995), 서울지방변호사회
- 김유환, "환매권의 법리 : 판례이론의 분석과 검토", 인권과 정의, (251) (1997), 대한변호사협회
- 김유환, "환매권의 법리: 판례이론의 분석과 검토, In 박윤흔박사 화갑기념논문집" (1997)
- 김해룡, "토지법상 환매권의 법리", 계명법학, 2 (1998)
- 류지태, "환매권행사의 제한", 고시계 (2001)
- 배병호, "공법상 환매제도에 관한 연구", 박사, 행정법, pp.2000
- 정연주, "재산권의 존속보장과 환매권", 법학연구, 12(2), pp.1~32 (2009), 법학연구소
- 신봉기, "토지비축사업과 환매권 행사기간", 토지공법연구, 43(1), pp.395~414 (2009), 한국토지공법학회
- 석종현, "공익사업의 변경과 환매권", 고시연구 (1995)
- 임호정, "토지보상법상 환매권에 대한 쟁점 논의", 토지보상법연구, 6 (2006), 한국토지보상법연구회
- 유원규, "공공사업에 제공된 토지의 환매권, In 재판의 한 길 ; 김용준 헌법재판소장 화갑기념" (1998)
- 유원규, "공익사업의 변환과 환매권의 행사", 대법원판례해설, (17) (1992), 법원도서관
