[Exclusive][Free Pass Farmland Qualification②] 7 out of 10 Are 'Fake Farmers'... 'Gyeongja Yujeon' Becomes Obsolete

Only 32.5% Are Farmers...Lax Management Leads to Nearly 100% Issuance Rate
Post-Regulation Farmland Act Predicted LH Scandal...No Punishment Provisions
Experts Call for Mandatory Full Survey and Establishment of Farmland Review Bodies

(Source: Eunhye Kim, Member of the People Power Party)

[Asia Economy Reporters Chae-eun Koo, Dong-pyo Kim] Among those who applied for farmland acquisition qualification certificates, only 3 out of 10 were classified as ‘farmers.’ This means that the constitutional Article 121, Clause 1 principle of ‘Gyeongja Yujeon’ (farmers owning farmland) has effectively become a dead letter. The farmland acquisition qualification certificate system is designed to screen the qualifications of those purchasing farmland and allow acquisition only to eligible individuals. However, in reality, anyone could easily acquire farmland, and post-management was virtually nonexistent.

100% Issuance Rate: Farmland Certificates Given to ‘Anyone’

According to data exclusively obtained by Asia Economy on the 22nd through the office of Kim Eun-hye, a member of the National Assembly Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee from the People Power Party, titled ‘Annual Application and Issuance Numbers of Gyeonggi Province Farmland Acquisition Qualification Certificates Over the Past Five Years,’ only 32.5% (107,157 people) of the total 330,045 applicants classified themselves as ‘farmers’ when filling out the farmland acquisition qualification certificate application over the past four years and three months. The rest were categorized as weekend or experiential farming at 32% (105,589 people), new farming at 26.7% (88,101 people), and corporations at 8.8% (29,198 people).

Due to lax management, the farmland acquisition qualification certificate has become a ‘certificate anyone can get.’ Although the number of issued certificates fluctuated annually, the issuance rate consistently hovered between 97% and 99%, nearly 100%. This means the certificate was issued without any real screening once applied for. In 2017, across Gyeonggi Province, 83,798 applications were submitted, and 82,558 certificates were issued, resulting in a 98.52% issuance rate. In 2018, 79,230 applications led to 78,105 issuances, a 98.58% rate. In 2019, the issuance rate was 98.23% (66,888 applications, 65,703 issuances), in 2020 it was 97.72% (78,572 applications, 76,777 issuances), and from January to March 2021, the issuance rate was 98.31% (26,520 applications, 26,072 issuances).

‘Gyeongja Yujeon’ Becomes a Dead Letter... Full Review of the Farmland Act Needed

[Image source=Yonhap News]

Experts point out that the LH employee speculation scandal was a predictable outcome under the current Farmland Act. Post-management was virtually nonexistent, allowing anyone to acquire farmland with no accountability. In fact, the Farmland Act was established in 1994 by consolidating the Farmland Reform Act and the Farmland Lease Management Act. From then on, farmland regulations shifted from preemptive to post-regulation. Acquisition of farmland was liberalized, but if farming activity was difficult, disposal orders could be issued afterward.

However, currently, even if fraud or forgery is detected during the farmland acquisition certification process, there are no penalties. Professor Dongcheon Sa of Hongik University Law School stated, “Even if farmland is acquired through forgery or fraudulent means, there is currently no punishment, only a disposal order within six months.” He added, “Post-penalties should be codified, and thorough investigation and management after farmland acquisition must be ensured.” Lawyer Younghwan Lim of the Citizens’ Coalition for Economic Justice mentioned, “It is necessary to establish a mandatory full survey regulation on farmland ownership and use in the Farmland Act and to set up a farmland review body.”

There is also a practical argument that the constitutional principle requiring farmland to be owned exclusively by farmers should be revised. Professor Kyo-eon Shim of Konkuk University’s Department of Real Estate said, “Given that most farmland transactions are currently conducted by non-farmers, the Farmland Act, which was created when the proportion of farmers engaged in agriculture was about 60%, needs to be comprehensively reviewed.”