地方 再開發⋅再建築 活性化를 위한 REITs 活用 方案 硏究 -不動産投資會社法制의 改善과 地方自治團體의 役割을 中心으로-

지방 재개발·재건축 활성화를 위한 리츠 활용과 제도 개선을 연구했다.

Despite their critical role in improving aging residential environments and revitalizing regional economies, redevelopment and reconstruction projects in non-metropolitan cities have stagnated owing to a structural disadvantage in project viability, the fragility of association-based project structures, and the limited inflow of private capital. This study reframes such stagnation as a deficiency in capital-mobilization mechanisms and examines, from a legal-institutional perspective, the applicability of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) as an alternative. The principal findings are as follows.

First, the stagnation of local urban renewal projects results from an institutional disconnect between the association-centered project structure under the Urban Renewal Act and the capital-market intermediation mechanism under the Real Estate Investment Company Act (the REIT Act). This disconnect is grounded theoretically in the concepts of transaction costs and the path dependence of capital mobilization: where the metropolitan presale market supplies a compensating channel, the disconnect remains latent, whereas in non-metropolitan areas, lacking such a channel, its effects are selectively actualized as project failure.

Second, the "REITs Revitalization Plan" of June 17, 2024 was implemented through the amended REIT Act, promulgated on May 27, 2025 and enforced on November 28, 2025, establishing the legal foundation for Project REITs to act as direct project implementers; the newly introduced Regional Mutual-Benefit REIT under Article 14-8(4) grants priority subscription rights to local residents. Third, the Japanese J-REIT model linked to urban regeneration legislation and the U.S.

UPREIT asset-contribution model should be received selectively in light of differing socioeconomic preconditions, so that a hybrid Korean model—combining designated-zone linkage, asset contribution, and resident priority subscription—emerges as the desirable design direction. Fourth, a model in which local governments participate as sponsors and co-implementers must be differentiated by the fiscal capacity of each local-government type, premised on consistency with the investment and local-bond requirements of the Local Finance Act and on the preservation of fiscal soundness.

On this basis, the study presents an integrated set of legislative tasks: the enactment of urban-renewal REIT special provisions under the REIT Act; the express inclusion of REITs as project implementers under the Urban Renewal Act together with the resolution of co-implementation issues; the reinforcement of differentiated support under the Local Tax Special Treatment Act and the Housing and Urban Fund Act; and the extension—conditional upon completion of the pending legislation—of the capital-gains tax deferral for in-kind contributions under the Restriction of Special Taxation Act.