Search for a command to run...
In the process of modern urban development and public interest projects, displacees are increasingly demanding the "retention" of their buildings based on the perspective of "compensation for continued existence," ultimately seeking to maintain their livelihoods or business sites beyond simple monetary compensation. Although the Special Act on Public Housing (Special Act) prescribes a "retention system" as an exception to the exercise of expropriation rights by public interest project implementers, previous discussions primarily focus on economic aspects, such as retention levies. Consequently, legal research regarding the possibility of litigation against the refusal of retention remains insufficient. This study systematically clarifies the legal nature of building retention occurring in the process of public housing district development projects and seeks judicial alternatives to control the arbitrary exercise of expropriation rights by project implementers, even when the requirements for retention are met. Accordingly, the term "retention" is first legally defined as used across various laws and the retention of buildings under the Special Act confirmed to function as a specific "retention system" that serves as an exception to the exercise of expropriation rights. This analysis identifies a structural gap where current precedents deny the administrative dispositivity of refusal of retention applications under the Special Act, thereby leaving the protection of property rights solely to the discretion of the project implementer. This study calls for a shift in the perception of the existing "right to apply" logic as a requirement for recognizing the dispositivity of a refusal of retention. Moreover, since the retention of buildings is not merely a reflective interest but a means of realizing the substantive value of constitutionally guaranteed property rights, judicial control over refusal dispositions must be substantiated to protect fundamental rights. The findings can serve as a legal basis for the rational operation of the building retention system and expansion of the scope of rights remedies for displacees in public housing districts.