2011, Vol.21, No.2

Korea Real Estate Review 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.56

pISSN : 2092-5395 / eISSN : 2733-8339
https://journal.kci.go.kr/krer

Korea is rapidly changing into an aged society with low birth rate. Due to this trend, real estate market in Korea will go under structural change. The purpose of this paper is to analyze structural changes in Japanese real estate market which is a precedent aging market with low birth rate, and to draw some lessons for Korea. Through literature survey and analysis with empirical data, major changes in Japanese real estate market are found as follows: 1) Aging society results in expansion of inter-regional as well as intra-regional disparity. Especially, local cities and suburban areas suffer more than large cities and inner-city areas. 2) Suburban areas located farther than 30km from Tokyo Metropolis suffer from deep land price decrease. 3) Even with overall high housing supply ratio, small-sized new apartments with central locations are well absorbed in the market. 4) Special care for aging as well as young population is needed in order for new housing to be absorbed in the market. These findings may suggest some implications for Korean real estate market: 1) Demographic changes by itself may not result in an immediate dip in real estate prices 2) However, Korean government should be cautious in making further new towns including so-called “innovation cities,” far from the center of large cities. 3) Some immediate measure should be taken in order for senior citizens could adjust and liquidate their housing stock.

The Unification of South and North Korea is a series of process of political, social and economic transformation, whatever the model of unification is. In this process social conflict and confusion related to ownership of real estate will be accompanied by juristical debates. Looking squarely on this kind of matter, the transformation, which can induce the social stabilization as effective as possible, is a touchstone for successful unification. Above all, in case that the original owners of the real estate begin to claim the recovery of property right, the conflict with the present users can be ignited into a serious social confrontation. This study tries to discuss principles of real estate management in the region of transformation based on the characteristics of land use. The key content of discussion is about restitution and compensation of real estate in order to mitigate the social confusion in the process of privatization and reconstruction. Conclusionally, this discussion will contribute in one hand the present users to mend their frustration and at least to secure their right of residence even after the transformation process, in the other hand the original owners of real estate to reasonably accept the recovery of property ownership based on forming the juristic consensus.

Repurchase is when part or all of land condemned for a public project is no longer needed due to cancellation or modification of the project and the land is purchased by the land owner or his/her legal heir to restore ownership. In 2005, the Constitutional Court ruled that the Land Compensation Act, Article 91, paragraph 4, that provides for development advantage portion of land price increase profits occurred in the repurchasing process to be allocated to the condemner is constitutional. However, when seen from the law and economics perspective that introduced repurchase rights in the first place to protect private property rights and to restrain over-condemnation opportunism on the part of the condemner, this Constitutional Court ruling must be reconsidered. Institutionally leaving all decision-making, including condemnation and project plan modification/cancellation, to the condemner and giving the condemner an opportunity to pursue profits from land-price increase means very high probability of morally hazardous doings by the condemner. An analysis of actual cases in which condemners filed suits for allocation of land-price increase profits showed that only 3.9 years is passed from land taking to repurchasing and that various opportunism possibilities exist. Under these circumstances, the policy must be reestablished to provide stronger protection for repurchasers in order to ensure more prudent decisions by land condemners in selecting land and to secure firm implementation of public projects.