도시계획변경에 따른 계획이익과 공공기여의 법제도적 고찰

도시계획 변경에 따른 계획이익과 공공기여 제도를 분석했다.

This study analyzes the legal structure of planning gain generated by amendments to urban plans and the public contribution mechanisms designed to recapture such gains, with a particular focus on the framework of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act of Korea. Planning gain is understood not as a result of private investment or entrepreneurial risk borne by landowners or developers, but as a passive economic benefit arising from administrative decisions to establish or modify binding urban plans. On this basis, the legitimacy of recapturing planning gain for public purposes is recognized.

However, conceptualizing planning gain as a form of development gain subject to the Development Gain Recapture Act risks blurring the boundary between distinct legal regimes and may give rise to concerns of overlapping financial burdens. Accordingly, this study argues that planning gain should be established as an independent and supplementary doctrinal concept, distinct from statutory development gains. Public contribution is examined as a comprehensive set of institutional mechanisms linking planning gain to public interests. A distinction is drawn between public contribution in a broad sense and public contribution in a narrow sense governed by Article 52-2 of the Act.

In the latter case, the provision of land or installation of public facilities within the limit of land value increase—measured by appraisal differences before and after plan amendments—constitutes the principle method of contribution, while monetary payment is permitted only as a supplementary and exceptional alternative when public facilities are deemed sufficient. Such payments should not be regarded as general charges or levies, but rather as substitute forms of in-kind performance. Furthermore, contributions in the form of donation are classified according to their functional relationship with planning gain.

This study categorizes public contribution under the Act into eight distinct types based on patterns of planning gain generation. Types 1 through 5—such as zoning changes through district unit plans, amendments to urban and district facility designations, and spatial innovation zones under spatial restructuring plans—share common features including a hybrid structure of statutory obligation and pre-negotiation, valuation based on land value increases, and a principle of in-kind contribution supplemented by monetary payment.

Types 6 through 8—such as regulatory relaxation within existing zoning districts or district unit plan areas—are characterized primarily by pre-negotiation mechanisms and land-area-based calculation methods. This typology clarifies the structural diversity embedded within the single term “public contribution” in terms of legal basis, procedure, calculation, and implementation methods. Finally, this study aims to deepen the understanding of planning gain and public contribution and to provide a macro-level, systematic overview of the various forms of public contribution under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act.