불법형질변경된 토지의 보상평가에 관한 연구

A Study on the Assessment of Compensation Concerning Land Illegally Altered in Form and Nature

불법형질변경된 토지는 형질변경이 될 당시의 이용상황을 상정하여 보상평가하도록 함으로써, 형질변경에 소요된 비용은 물론 그에 따른 개발이익이 손실보상대상에서 배제된다. 그러나 이 제도가 마련된 1995.1.7. 이전에 공익사업시행지구에 편입된 토지는 현실적인 이용상황에 따라 보상한다. 이와 같은 사항은 그 근거가 건설교통부령인 토지보상법시행규칙에 있기 때문에 행정규칙에 의한 권리의 제한이라는 논란이 있다. 그리고 1995.1.7 불법형질변경된 토지에 대하여 현황평가하지 않고 형질변경될 당시의 이용상황을 상정하여 보상평가하도록 제도를 신설하면서 경과조치에 의하여 과거에 불법형질변경한 것을 모두 기득권으로 인정하지 않고 당시 공익사업시행지구에 편입되어있는 토지에 한하여 현황평가하고 1995.1.7. 이전에 불법형질변경된 토지도 1995.1.7. 당시에 공익사업시행지구에 편입되어 있지 않으면 형질변경되기 전의 이용상황을 상정하여 평가하도록 하여, 이것이 법률불소급의 원칙에 반하는 것은 아닌가 하는 논란이 있다. 위와 같은 논란을 없애기 위하여서는, 첫째 불법형질변경된 토지의 보상평가방법 및 그 경과조치를 대통령령인 토지보상법시행령으로 정하고, 둘째 1995.1.7. 이전에 형질변경된 토지에 대하여 모두 기득권을 인정하는 입법조치가 필요하다고 하겠다.

As the land illegally altered in form and nature shall be assessed in consideration of the situation of its utilization, in accordance with Land Expropriation and Compensation Act, the relevant expenses incurred from its alteration, and profit derided from its development could be excluded from the said compensation. However, since the above policy has been reflected in the Administrative Regulation of the Government, It has often argued that this regulation could inevitably restrict proper protection of the right of land. As mentioned above, in case the land altered in form and nature is to be assessed in accordance with an Administrative Regulation, and the Administrative Regulation has not been regulated as a Presidential Decree, the Regulation may possibly restrict the proper right of land. Furthermore, the land illegally altered in form and nature before January 17,1995 is to be assessed, not on present situation of land, but on previous situation of the land. This policy may be feared to invite another argument that its implementation will contradict with non-retroactive principle of law. We declines to state that such policy would be a reasonable one. In view of these, I would like to present following two suggestions to readjust the policy in due course to meet the necessity of justifiable compensation of land. Firstly, the means and process of the proper compensation on the land altered in form and nature should be described not in the Administrative Regulation of the Ministry of Construction and Transportation, but in the respective Presidential Decree. Trough this measures to be taken, the pending argued problem to infringe the proper land right by the Administrative Regulation can easily be resolved. Secondly, the land altered in form and nature before January 17,1995 should be regarded as legitimate, enabling to uphold the protection of the property rights.