공유수면 매립지의 관할 결정과 지방자치권 보장을 위한 헌법적 과제 - 지방자치법 제5조를 중심으로 - = Constitutional Challenges in Determining Jurisdiction over Reclaimed Public Waters and Protecting Local Autonomy - Focusing on Article 5 of the Local Autonomy Act -

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The jurisdictional boundaries of local governments constitute the spatial scope of local autonomy and serve as a fundamental basis for residents’ living spheres and local fiscal capacity. In Korea—where three sides are surrounded by seas—national territory has continuously expanded through land reclamation, and disputes over the jurisdiction of reclaimed land have emerged as significant constitutional issues closely linked to the substantive guarantee of local autonomy. Traditionally, jurisdictional conflicts over reclaimed sea areas were resolved by the Constitutional Court through competence dispute adjudication, relying on customary administrative boundaries such as maritime demarcation lines, due to the absence of explicit statutory criteria. However, the 2009 amendment to the Local Autonomy Act introduced a system in which the Minister of the Interior and Safety determines the jurisdiction of reclaimed land upon deliberation by the Central Dispute Mediation Committee, with subsequent judicial review assigned to the Supreme Court. While this system filled a legal vacuum and improved procedural efficiency, it has also raised concerns regarding excessive central government intervention.
This study critically examines the constitutional issues inherent in the current jurisdictional decision-making system for reclaimed sea areas. First, granting exclusive authority to the Minister risks infringing upon the essential substance of local autonomy guaranteed by the Constitution and may allow politically motivated or discretionary decisions. Second, the absence of clear substantive legal standards for jurisdictional determination leads to legal uncertainty. Third, potential conflicts between the Supreme Court’s adjudicatory role and the Constitutional Court’s competence dispute jurisdiction remain unresolved, and the current process lacks sufficient democratic legitimacy due to limited participation by residents and local governments.
To address these problems, this study proposes establishing explicit statutory criteria for maritime and reclaimed land boundaries, strengthening intergovernmental consultation and public participation, and clarifying the relationship between administrative litigation and competence dispute adjudication. Ultimately, the jurisdictional determination system for reclaimed sea areas must be restructured to reinforce the substantive guarantee of local autonomy and uphold the constitutional value of grassroots democracy.