Open Decision Ledger · Civil obligations & remedies
Enumerated public facilities under the gratuitous attribution regime
Supreme Court, Nov. 26, 2020, 2019Da209611 (judgment)
Case name: 부당이득금
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
In a housing site development project, does 'public facilities' subject to the old and new regime of gratuitous attribution under Article 25(1) of the former Housing Site Development Promotion Act include a newly installed basic infrastructure facility under Article 2(6) of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act, so that it vests in the managing authority without payment on the completion inspection date?
Holding
No. Terms used in individual statutes are read in the light of each statute's purpose, and the public facilities to which this regime applies are only those enumerated in Article 2(13) of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 4 of its Enforcement Decree, less the parking lots, playing fields, cemeteries, crematoria and columbaria that Article 25(1) of the former Housing Site Development Promotion Act and Article 15(1) of its Enforcement Decree expressly exclude. A newly installed facility does not become a public facility for this purpose merely because it is a basic infrastructure facility under Article 2(6) of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act or falls within the facility sites for public facilities under Article 2(2) of the former Housing Site Development Promotion Act.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
택지개발사업의 시행에서 신구 공공시설 무상귀속 제도가 적용되는 ‘공공시설’이란 구 국토계획법 제2조 제13호, 구 국토계획법 시행령 제4조에서 구체적으로 열거한 공공시설 중에서 구 택지개발촉진법 제25조 제1항, 택지개발촉진법 시행령 제15조 제1항에서 명시적으로 제외하도록 규정하고 있는 주차장, 운동장, 공동묘지, 화장시설, 봉안시설을 제외한 나머지를 의미한다고 보아야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
In the implementation of a housing site development project, the 'public facilities' to which the system of free transfer of existing and new public facilities applies must be regarded as meaning those facilities, other than the parking lots, sports grounds, common cemeteries, cremation facilities, and columbarium facilities that Article 25 (1) of the former Housing Site Development Promotion Act and Article 15 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act expressly exclude, among the public facilities specifically enumerated in Article 2, subparagraph 13 of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act.
Disposition
Reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 대전지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daejeon District Court.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
택지개발사업의 시행으로 새로 설치되는 공공시설이 구 국토계획법 제2조 제6호에서 정한 ‘기반시설’ 또는 구 택지개발촉진법 제2조 제2호에서 정한 ‘공공시설용지’의 적용대상에 해당한다고 하더라도, 구 국토계획법 제2조 제13호, 구 국토계획법 시행령 제4조에서 구체적으로 열거한 공공시설에 해당하지 않는 이상 신구 공공시설 무상귀속 제도가 적용되는 공공시설이라고 볼 수는 없다.
Unofficial English translation
Even if a public facility newly installed through the implementation of a housing site development project falls within the subject of application of the 'infrastructure' as defined in Article 2, subparagraph 6 of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act or the 'public facility site' as defined in Article 2, subparagraph 2 of the former Housing Site Development Promotion Act, unless it corresponds to the public facilities specifically enumerated in Article 2, subparagraph 13 of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act, it cannot be regarded as a public facility to which the system of free transfer of existing and new public facilities applies.
Factors
- 개별 법령에서 사용하는 용어는 각 법령의 입법 목적과 취지에 따라 개별적으로 해석하여야 한다
- 구 국토계획법 제2조 제13호, 구 국토계획법 시행령 제4조에서 구체적으로 열거한 공공시설 중에서
- 구 택지개발촉진법 제25조 제1항, 택지개발촉진법 시행령 제15조 제1항에서 명시적으로 제외하도록 규정하고 있는 주차장, 운동장, 공동묘지, 화장시설, 봉안시설을 제외한 나머지를
- 구 국토계획법 제2조 제13호, 구 국토계획법 시행령 제4조에서 구체적으로 열거한 공공시설에 해당하지 않는 이상
- 신구 공공시설 무상귀속 제도의 적용 범위를 구체적으로 특정·제한하기 위하여 둔 관련 규정들의 내용과 체계를 종합하면
Unofficial English translation
• the terms used in individual statutes must be interpreted individually in light of the legislative purpose and intent of each statute
• among the public facilities specifically enumerated in Article 2, subparagraph 13 of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act,
• those other than the parking lots, sports grounds, common cemeteries, cremation facilities, and columbarium facilities that Article 25 (1) of the former Housing Site Development Promotion Act and Article 15 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act expressly exclude,
• unless they correspond to the public facilities specifically enumerated in Article 2, subparagraph 13 of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act,
• upon a comprehensive review of the content and system of the relevant provisions enacted to specifically identify and limit the scope of application of the system of free transfer of existing and new public facilities,
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2007. 10. 15. 선고 2007두6427 판결
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2007Du6427 decided October 15, 2007
Decisions referred to
대법원 2007. 10. 15. 선고 2007두6427 판결
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
Where a newly installed facility falls outside the enumeration and the parties have no agreement on attribution, on what basis, if any, may ownership of that facility pass?
The judgment the Daejeon District Court delivers on remand, once published, will show how the enumeration is applied to a waste treatment facility and how the agreement claim is handled. Any amendment to Article 2(13) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act or Article 4 of its Enforcement Decree would also require this entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-25
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “Where a newly installed facility falls outside the enumeration and the parties have no agreement on attribution, on what basis, if any, may ownership of that facility pass?” vs Independent “How should a facility combining an enumerated public use with an expressly excluded use be classified for gratuitous vesting?”
The primary asks on what basis ownership passes for a facility outside the enumeration without agreement, while the independent reading asks how to classify a facility that combines enumerated and excluded uses.
택지개발사업의 시행에서 신구 공공시설 무상귀속 제도가 적용되는 ‘공공시설’이란 구 국토계획법 제2조 제13호, 구 국토계획법 시행령 제4조에서 구체적으로 열거한 공공시설 중에서 구 택지개발촉진법 제25조 제1항, 택지개발촉진법 시행령 제15조 제1항에서 명시적으로 제외하도록 규정하고 있는 주차장, 운동장, 공동묘지, 화장시설, 봉안시설을 제외한 나머지를 의미한다고 보아야 한다.Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Daejeon District Court, in its judgment of 22 January 2019 (2018Na103547), read Article 25(1) of the former Housing Site Development Promotion Act and Article 65(1) of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act as extending gratuitous attribution to basic infrastructure facilities under Article 2(6) of the latter. It found that the facility in this case, a waste treatment facility under item (g) of Article 2(6), was such a basic infrastructure facility and vested in the defendant without payment on the completion inspection date of 25 June 2013, so the defendant had to take over from the plaintiff the obligation to register the transfer of ownership. On that premise it also held that the defendant had to return to the plaintiff, as unjust enrichment, the equivalent of the maintenance and management costs the plaintiff had incurred after that date.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that this was an error of law on the scope of the gratuitous attribution regime that affected the judgment. Because the facility could not be held to have vested in the defendant, the part of the judgment ordering return of unjust enrichment could no longer stand either, so the whole judgment was reversed and the case remanded to the Daejeon District Court. The Court added that a claim for transfer registration founded on an agreement between the parties is a separate object of litigation from one founded on gratuitous attribution, and that after remand the court should clarify whether the plaintiff also seeks adjudication of the agreement claim, invite correction of the claim as stated, and decide it once the claim is specific.
Distinguishing conditions
- A newly installed facility that appears on the list in Article 2(13) of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act or Article 4 of its Enforcement Decree and is not one of the five excluded categories.
- A project other than a housing site development project, since the Court defined the term for the implementation of a housing site development project.
- A dispute over attribution that rests on an agreement between the parties rather than on the statutory regime, since the Court treated that claim as a separate object of litigation.
Record verification notes
Set the facility against the list in Article 2(13) of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 4 of its Enforcement Decree item by item, then remove the parking lots, playing fields, cemeteries, crematoria and columbaria that the Housing Site Development Promotion Act excludes. Check which version governs, because the decision applied the Housing Site Development Promotion Act as it stood before the amendment of 30 May 2011 (Act No. 10764), the National Land Planning and Utilization Act as it stood before 16 July 2013 (Act No. 11922), and the Enforcement Decree as it stood before 19 September 2017 (Presidential Decree No. 28326). Look also for any agreement between the parties on attribution, since a claim founded on it is pleaded separately from one founded on gratuitous attribution.
From the official text
Points at issue
구 택지개발촉진법상 신구 공공시설 무상귀속의 대상이 되는 ‘공공시설’의 의미
Unofficial English translation
The meaning of 'public facilities' that are subject to the free transfer of existing and new public facilities under the former Housing Site Development Promotion Act
Summary of the holding
개별 법령에서 사용하는 용어는 각 법령의 입법 목적과 취지에 따라 개별적으로 해석하여야 한다. 구 택지개발촉진법(2011. 5. 30. 법률 제10764호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 같다) 제25조 제1항은 시행자가 택지개발사업의 시행으로 새로이 공공시설(주차장, 운동장 등 대통령령이 정하는 시설은 제외한다)을 설치하거나 기존의 공공시설에 대체되는 시설을 설치한 경우 그 귀속에 관하여는 국토의 계획 및 이용에 관한 법률 제65조 및 제99조의 규정을 준용하고, 이 경우 ‘행정청인 시행자’는 이를 이 법에 의한 ‘시행자’로 본다고 규정하고 있다. 그 위임에 따른 택지개발촉진법 시행령 제15조 제1항은 구 택지개발촉진법 제25조 제1항 전단에서 ‘대통령령으로 정하는 시설’이란 공동묘지, 화장시설, 봉안시설을 말한다고 규정하고 있다. 구 국토의 계획 및 이용에 관한 법률(2013. 7. 16. 법률 제11922호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 ‘구 국토계획법’이라 한다) 제65조 제1항은 개발행위허가를 받은 자가 행정청인 경우 그가 새로 공공시설을 설치하거나 기존의 공공시설에 대체되는 공공시설을 설치하는 경우에는 ‘국유재산법’과 ‘공유재산 및 물품관리법’에도 불구하고 새로 설치된 공공시설은 그 시설을 관리할 관리청에 무상으로 귀속되고, 종래의 공공시설은 개발사업의 시행자에게 무상으로 귀속된다고 규정하고 있다. 이와 같은 신구 공공시설 무상귀속 제도의 적용 범위를 구체적으로 특정·제한하기 위하여 구 국토계획법 제2조 제13호는 ‘공공시설’이란 도로·공원·철도·수도, 그 밖에 대통령령으로 정하는 공공용 시설을 말한다고 규정하고, 그 위임에 따른 구 국토의 계획 및 이용에 관한 법률 시행령(2017. 9. 19. 대통령령 제28326호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 ‘구 국토계획법 시행령’이라 한다) 제4조는 구 국토계획법 제2조 제13호에서 ‘대통령령으로 정하는 공공용 시설’이란 항만·공항·운하·광장·녹지·공공공지·공동구·하천·유수지·방화설비·방풍설비·방수설비·사방설비·방조설비·하수도·구거(제1호), 행정청이 설치하는 주차장·운동장·저수지·화장장·공동묘지·봉안시설(제2조), 유비쿼터스도시의 건설 등에 관한 법률 제2조 제3호 (다)목에 따른 시설(제3호)을 말한다고 규정하고 있다. 이와 같이 택지개발사업의 시행에서 신구 공공시설 무상귀속 제도의 적용 범위를 구체적으로 특정·제한하기 위하여 둔 관련 규정들의 내용과 체계를 종합하면, 택지개발사업의 시행에서 신구 공공시설 무상귀속 제도가 적용되는 ‘공공시설’이란 구 국토계획법 제2조 제13호, 구 국토계획법 시행령 제4조에서 구체적으로 열거한 공공시설 중에서 구 택지개발촉진법 제25조 제1항, 택지개발촉진법 시행령 제15조 제1항에서 명시적으로 제외하도록 규정하고 있는 주차장, 운동장, 공동묘지, 화장시설, 봉안시설을 제외한 나머지를 의미한다고 보아야 한다. 택지개발사업의 시행으로 새로 설치되는 공공시설이 구 국토계획법 제2조 제6호에서 정한 ‘기반시설’ 또는 구 택지개발촉진법 제2조 제2호에서 정한 ‘공공시설용지’의 적용대상에 해당한다고 하더라도, 구 국토계획법 제2조 제13호, 구 국토계획법 시행령 제4조에서 구체적으로 열거한 공공시설에 해당하지 않는 이상 신구 공공시설 무상귀속 제도가 적용되는 공공시설이라고 볼 수는 없다.
Order
원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 대전지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daejeon District Court.
Provisions referred to
구 택지개발촉진법(2011. 5. 30. 법률 제10764호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제2조 제2호, 제25조 제1항, 구 국토의 계획 및 이용에 관한 법률(2013. 7. 16. 법률 제11922호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제2조 제6호, 제13호, 제65조 제1항, 택지개발촉진법 시행령 제15조 제1항, 구 국토의 계획 및 이용에 관한 법률 시행령(2017. 9. 19. 대통령령 제28326호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제4조
Read 2026-10-25 · Cross-read 2026-10-25. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger