수용절차상 재결신청청구제도에 관한 연구

Abstract

Act on the Acquisition of Land etc. for Public Works and the Compensation stipulates the expropriation proceedings for the efficient implementation of public works and the pertinent protection of property rights. In principle, the expropriation proceedings are initiated by a request of a business operator when it is impossible to reach an agreement with a landowner. Under the spirit of equality, the claim for adjudication requests and additional dues on delay are permitted for a landowner and involved person who do not have a right to claim for adjudication request. One of the important legal issues associated with the claim for adjudication requests is whether a business operator informs a landowner about the compensation with the specified period of agreement. And the another issue is the effectiveness of the claim for adjudication requests related with the point of the claim requested from the termination of the agreement. If the landowner has a clear intention to claim for adjudication requests, it is appropriate to permit widely the effectiveness of the claim even though the notification of the compensation agreements is taken after considerable period of time from the notification of business recognition. The main controversy in regard of the additional dues on delay is the initial date of reckoning the permitted period of the adjudication requests which is 60 days. This issue is directly linked to the discussion about the effectiveness of the delayed claim. In the related legislation, 60 days of permitted period should be guaranteed for a business operator. Furthermore the interpretation should preserve the inherent purpose of the additional dues on delay which exists for securing the real effect of adjudication requests by a landowner and etc. Ultimately the interpretation of the adjudication request and additional dues on delay begins from the distinct awareness about the fact that the adjudication requests in Public Works legislation is permitted only for a business operator in principle. This is because the significance of existence of the related legislation is to minimize unreasonable and unequal factors generated from the concentration of the adjudication request.