Hello, this is attorney Park Jong-han of Cheongchul Law Firm.

This post examines the principal practical issues surrounding the establishment of a renewal master plan and the designation of a renewal zone — the first stage of a renewal project under the Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments (the "Urban Renewal Act").

[Question] What is the legal character of a renewal master plan, and of a renewal plan and zone designation, and are they subject to appeal litigation?

[Answer]

A. Legal character of the renewal master plan — a non-binding administrative plan

A renewal master plan sits below the urban or county master plan under the National Land Planning and Utilisation Act, and above the renewal plan. The courts have characterised an urban master plan as "no more than an internal guideline for administrative agencies, a non-binding administrative plan without direct binding force on the general public," and the same reasoning applies to renewal master plans.

Supreme Court Decision 2000Du8226 (11 October 2002) held that "an urban master plan is a comprehensive plan presenting the basic spatial structure and long-term development direction of a city; although it sets out the general direction of future urban development through land use plans, environmental plans and park and green space plans, it is no more than a guideline for the drafting of urban plans and has no direct binding force on the general public," thereby making clear that an urban master plan is not a disposition subject to appeal litigation. In practice, a revocation action directed at the renewal master plan itself is in principle denied standing, so an individual landowner will ordinarily challenge the subsequent renewal plan and zone designation instead.

B. Legal character and effect of the renewal plan and zone designation

By contrast, a renewal plan and zone designation constitute a concrete implementation plan for the renewal project and are binding administrative dispositions directly affecting the rights and obligations of the public, and are therefore subject to appeal (revocation) litigation. Under Article 17(1) of the current Urban Renewal Act, where a renewal zone is designated and published, those matters within the zone and plan falling under any subparagraph of Article 52(1) of the National Land Planning and Utilisation Act are deemed to have been determined and published as a district unit plan under Article 50 of that Act.

Of particular practical importance is that, following designation, development activity within the zone — construction or change of use of buildings, installation of structures, subdivision or alteration of the form and quality of land — is restricted, and the project area and the owners of land and buildings are fixed, making it possible to apply for approval of a union establishment promotion committee. An interested party wishing to challenge a renewal plan or zone designation must therefore bring a revocation action within the 90-day filing period running from the date of the designation notice.

C. Treatment of apartment district development master plans under the former Housing Construction Promotion Act

As to the "apartment district development master plans" established under Article 20 of the former Housing Construction Promotion Act before the enactment of the Urban Renewal Act, Article 5(3) of the Addenda to the former Urban Renewal Act provides a transitional rule deeming such plans, and district unit plans, to be renewal plans established under that Act.

In Supreme Court Decision 2012Du5572 (20 August 2014), addressing that transitional provision, the court proceeded on the premise that — unlike the former Urban Renewal Act's requirement that a union's project area coincide with the renewal zone — implementation and union establishment covering only part of the land within an apartment district could be permitted under the former apartment district development master plan on which the union's establishment was based, and ruled on the validity of a subsequent authorisation to amend that union's establishment. Where a project was formed through procedures under the former Housing Construction Promotion Act, therefore, the procedures and transitional provisions of the former law must be examined together rather than simply applying the requirements of the current Urban Renewal Act.

Cheongchul Law Firm is composed exclusively of attorneys from Korea's five largest law firms — Kim & Chang, Lee & Ko, Bae, Kim & Lee, Shin & Kim and Yulchon — as well as the prosecution service and corporate legal teams, and responds with a team of specialists in the relevant fields rather than a single attorney. Cheongchul goes beyond resolving isolated issues to provide comprehensive solutions across a client's business, focusing on legal consulting that ultimately achieves what the client wants. If you need help reaching your goals, please do not hesitate to contact us.