부동산개발이익 환수부담금의 적합성평가

부동산 개발이익 환수부담금의 산정기준과 적법성 등을 평가했다.

The enforcement of the allotments that is imposed on the people must be stricter than that of taxes. People point out that there is no guarantee of equality rights set by the constitution for allotments, its burden is excessive and redundant, and that is why it is becoming a social issue. Therefore, this study presented the feasibility of calculation standards, non-redundancy of allotments and legality as the method to solve the above matters and defined the compatibility of allotments to comprehend the above concepts . Also, this study built the analysis model to assess the compatibility of allotments and attempted a comprehensive and systematic approach on this matter.

I think there is a need to closely examine the compatibility of allotments in securing the effectiveness of the allotment system. In this study, through theoretical examination, development act means a physical type, and development gains is defined as including the tangible, intangible, and other socio-economic concepts. I have organized the existing theory on the justification of the returning of development gains, and have established a theory that development gains occur in both the act of changing the land characteristics and the act of construction. I have searched the economic effect of development gains and the measurement of development gains based on existing theories.

I have also examined the justification of tax and separate special allotments through precedents. Since preceding studies had randomly classified allotments, I have felt the need to classify all the allotments, and have newly attempted to systematically classify allotments. Through this, I have limited the scope of this study. The results of compatibility are in the followings. First, as a result of evaluating the validity of allotments, in the case of allotments exclusively for farm land, allotments were being imposed despite of the fact that development gains had regional differentials, and the allotment ratio appeared have severe deviation by each land category.

And there was a severe gap between allotment ratios of similar allotments. Since in the case of some allotments the average allotment on development gains were imposed exceeding the development gains, it had the possibility to encroach capital, and by imposing a fixed amount without connection to development gains, it was not able to respond to the benefit according to the act of development.

Second, in case of redundancy, although there was no redundancy between allotments imposed to the act of changing land characteristics and allotments imposed to the act of construction, there was redundancy among allotments imposed to the act of changing land characteristics and among allotments from the act of construction. Third, some gain return allotments were going against the rule of minimum violation and the rule of balance in the benefit and protection of the law among the rule of proportion. Meanwhile, if you analyze just one individual allotment, you can say the extent of violation is small.

But if multiple allotments are imposed simultaneously, the extent of the violation will become greater. Therefore, we can say redundant allotments go against the rule of minimum violation. Since securing the compatibility of allotments work to raise the effectiveness of the allotment policy, there is a need for several alternatives. First, if you want to secure validity, there is a need to change the imposition of a fixed ratio to 'site' by usage areas and the gap of land category subject to development. Allotment ratio is due to the contradiction of equally imposing a fixed amount, it must be amended to an allotment that corresponds to the development gains.

There is a need to unify the base price at the expiration point of the reconstruction allotment to appraised price. Second, in order to correct redundant impositions, there is a need to simplify the gain return allotment system. We must divide up the development gains into two allotments: allotment from the act of changing land characteristics and allotments from the act of construction, and integrate and manage the allotments from each act into one law. it can be presented that the allotment from the act of changing land characteristics is integrated to integrate allotments into the existing 'law on returning of development gains.

It will be reasonable that the existing allotment from the act of construction is amalgamated into 'the law on infrastructure allotment.' As a means to secure legality, in the case of allotment for damaging limited development district, if you want to abide by the rule of minimum violation and the balance in the benefit and protection of the law, the calculation method must be amended from method based on the land price differential between the land category of the area outside the existing limited development district and the land category before the relevant development to the method based on land price differential between the 'site' within the limited development district and the land category before the relevant development.

If you wish to abide by the rule of minimum violation of the reconstruction allotment, you must make sure there are no artificial gains. To do that, you must determine the appraised amount as the price at the point of expiration instead of the sales price. As a result of the study, what I've discovered is that there are rather more development gains in an area serviced with infrastructure. The reason behind it is because the act of development is being carried out while benefiting from various infrastructures already set in place by the government, and therefore, there is more synergistic effect compared to areas with poor infrastructure.

Yet there is a problem because the government is imposing not enough allotments to the area benefiting from these infrastructures, and excessively imposing allotments on areas that are not benefiting from infrastructures. In addition to that, by having an im