A great turning point in farmland regulation, practical implications of Gyeongyujeon (耕者有田)

The principle of tiller-ownership of farmland (Gyeongjayujeon, 耕者有田) is now at a critical turning point. This principle, which is rooted in Article 121 of the Constitution, stipulates that those who actually farm should own farmland, and was an expression of a strong will to prevent land monopoly by minority landlords and preserve farmland as a national asset. However, as the contemporary demands of ‘strict ownership and flexible use’ collide, a new phase in which opportunities and risks coexist is unfolding.

The first thing that stands out is deregulation through ‘spatial reorganization’ of farmland. The government is absorbing urban residents' demand for ‘5 degrees and 2 villages’ by introducing a ‘rural residential shelter’ system from the end of 2025 to early 2026, allowing the installation of temporary accommodation of approximately 33㎡ without a permit for exclusive use of farmland.

Regulations on smart farms and vertical farms have also been greatly relaxed, making it possible to install permanent facilities on farmland if certain requirements are met. This shows that farmland is evolving beyond simple farmland into a base for high value-added technology businesses. (Article 2, Paragraph 7 of the Farmland Act) Furthermore, the release of small-scale farmland (agricultural promotion area) of less than 3ha was permitted, opening the way to converting inefficient farmland into convenience and commercial facilities.

As mentioned above, while regulations on farmland use have been relaxed, ownership regulations have actually become tighter. This is something to pay attention to in the current farmland system. First, at the acquisition stage, the examination for farmland acquisition qualifications was made practical, so acquisition by outsiders and purchase of shared shares were strictly restricted, and acquisition for weekend and experiential farming purposes in agricultural promotion areas was legally blocked. In addition, in the post-acquisition management stage, a real-time monitoring network combining drones, satellites, and administrative data is operated to constantly monitor uncultivated cultivation or illegal use. In particular, the enforcement fine imposed upon detection amounts to 25% of the land value, which is so punitive that an amount equivalent to the entire land value must be paid in just four years.

Attorney Kim Gwang-deok of Daeryun Law Firm said, "In the end, the current farmland market is a place where 'doors of opportunity' and 'risk traps' coexist. Distributed acquisition or reckless neglect under family names can lead to criminal punishment beyond administrative disposition." He added, "Therefore, if you are planning a farmland-related business or considering inheritance or purchase, a legal review that analyzes relaxed regulatory conditions and strengthened punishment regulations in three dimensions must be preceded. Only legal acquisition and elaborate utilization plans can secure assets. “It is the only surety check that is protected, and the answer begins with the diagnosis of an expert who accurately understands the changed legal principles.”

[View full article]
A great transition period in farmland regulation, practical implications of land ownership (go to)