Publications

Detailed Information

한국의 민간투자사업에 대한 비판적 고찰 : Analytical observation of public-private partnerships in Korea

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.advisor정광호-
dc.contributor.author안상열-
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-07T07:08:52Z-
dc.date.available2019-05-07T07:08:52Z-
dc.date.issued2019-02-
dc.identifier.other000000155402-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/153045-
dc.description학위논문 (박사)-- 서울대학교 대학원 : 행정대학원 정책학과, 2019. 2. 정광호.-
dc.description.abstractPublic-Private Partnerships(PPP) in Korea brought about investment

worth KRW104 trillion, making significant progress. However, it has

been under severe criticism that it sucks up tax payers money.

With that regard, I sought to discuss the prospect of PPPs. My

discussion relates to Minimum Revenue Guarantee(MRG) with focus

on the timeline of implementation, transition process, international

comparison, implication for the rate of return and comparison between

private and public financing.

As for the major milestones of PPPs, the permission of unsolicited

projects in 2016 and PPPs extended to social service industry have

been highlighted. MRG has been carried out as stipulated in separate- 134 -

laws, such as Harbor Act and Toll Road Act.

Speaking of the transition process of MRG, separate laws define that

the period of free use can be scaled up or down rather than

curtailing only. The difference between guaranteed profits and cost

recovery comes from lower applicable interest rates and lower level

of guarantees on demand, not the guarantee mechanism. Therefore,

any potential increase in treasury bond interest rates must be taken

into account. Furthermore, as observed from Busan New Port

Development project, the operating entity joining the consortium as an

investor could lead to positive results- the abolishment of MRG by

the proposal of private partner.

According to international comparisons of PPPs, Korea follows the

continental law legal system, a collection of written rules while the

announcement of basic plan for PPPs acts like government guidelines

applying the principles of the common law. Meanwhile, the allocation

of demand risk was referred to the classification of European

Investment Bank(EIB).

MRG in Korea has similarities with those of Chile and Turkey in

terms of defining the provision of guarantees and redemption.

Differences are found in that MRG was initiated by the extension of

period of free use under separate laws in Korea and revised as a

readjusted financing method in case of refinancing and project

restructuring. Its dynamism differentiates MRG in Korea from others.

MRG has implications for the rate of return and attraction of the

private funds. MRG provision was initially expected to help ease

uncertainties surrounding PPPs and therefore, set the rate of return at

a lower level. However, it turned out that MRG and the rate of- 135 -

return are positively correlated.

PPP projects with MRG provision had a greater relation on the size

of the total project cost. The number of concession agreements

signed was higher before MRG was abolished at an annual average

of 12.2 compared with an annual average of 5.1 after its abolishment.

The correlation between MRG provision and the rate of return seems

to be caused by political purposes to boost the economy and attract

the private fund since the IMF, insufficient experience as well as

information asymmetry among others. According to the ex-post

analysis of value for money(VFM) for Cheonan-Nonsan Expressway,

a lower level of MRG and fall in prices improve vfm while falls in

discount rate and treasury bond interest rate compromised vfm. Even

though additional variables, such as the total project cost, operating

profits, operating cost, construction period, the period of free use and

the rate of return are included in the analysis, no specific method

stood out as notably excellent. However, such analysis provides

valuable lessons as follows.

First, better understanding of MRG and PPPs are required.

Furthermore, demand analysis has to be done accurately to enhance

efficiency in project implementation as PPP projects under separate

laws or by public corporation also lead to demand risk distribution.

Second, any upward trend in interest rates must be at guard. The

PPP operator has to be encouraged to participate in the project as an

investor and competition has to be invited to PPPs. Third, for further

progress in PPPs, demand risk distribution has to be met with policy

adjustment, such as reducing the rate of return. Forth, many

variables have to be examined before selecting which implementation

method is better than others. Empirical evidence must be carefully- 136 -

studied. I hope more empirical literature accumulates overseas and

Koreas PPPs applies across the globe. Additionally, valuable data

accumulated by operating PPP projects must be thoroughly analyzed

to inform upcoming PPP projects for better outcomes.
-
dc.description.abstract국문초록

민간투자사업은 104조원의 투자가 이루어지는 등 성과를 거두고 있지만

혈세 먹는 하마로 표현되는 등 비판도 많다. 특히 논쟁의 대상이 되어

왔던 최소운영수입보장제도와 관련하여 도입시기와 변천과정, 국제비교,

실시협약상 수익률과의 관계, 민자사업 추진과 재정사업 추진의 비교 사

례 등 다양한 고찰을 통하여 향후 방향을 알아보고자 하였다.

우선, 민간투자제도의 변천과정은 2016년 민간제안 허용 반영과 사회

서비스 사업으로의 확대를 주목할 필요가 있으며, 최소운영수입보장제도

는 항만법, 유료도로법 등 개별 법률 규정을 통해 도입 및 운영되어 왔

음을 살펴보았다. 최소운영수입보장제도 변천 특징을 알아보면, 개별법의

경우에는 무상사용기간의 변화가 축소 위주가 아니라 축소와 확대가 섞

여 있다는 점, 수입에 대한 보장과 민간 비용에 대한 보장의 차이는 보

장 방식보다 적용된 이자율이 낮고 수요 보장의 수준도 적다는 점에 기

인하므로 국고채 이자률 상승에도 대비가 필요한 점, 부산 신항만의 경

우처럼 민간사업자의 제안에 따라 MRG가 폐지된 경우가 특이한 바 운

영사를 출자자로 참여시키는 것이 좋은 결과를 가져온다는 점 등을 알

수 있다.

민간투자제도를 국제 비교해 보면 우리나라는 성문법인 대륙법적 체계

를 따르지만 민간투자기본계획 공포를 통해 영미법의 정부가이드라인 성

격도 가지며, 수요 위험에 대한 배분 측면에서는 유럽투자은행 분류에

따른 다양한 제도를 시행하여 왔다고 할 수 있다. 최소운영수입보장제도

는 칠레와 터키처럼 보장과 환수를 동시에 규정하는 방식으로 유사한 점

이 있으나, 개별법에서 무상사용기간 연장을 통하여 시작되었고, 자금재

조달․사업재구조화의 금융조달 재조정방식으로 수정되는 등 역동성을

가진 점에서 차별성을 가진다고 할 수 있다.

MRG 제도와 실시협약 투자수익률과 민간재원 투자유인 효과간의 관

계를 보면, MRG 보장 여부는 불확실성을 완화시킴으로써 수익률이 낮

게 설정될 것이라는 기대와 달리 민간투자사업의 수익률에 양의 상관관계

를 나타내었다. 또한 총사업비 규모에는 MRG 보장 민간투자사업이 더욱- ii -

크게 반응하였고, MRG 존속기간 중 민간투자사업 제안 사업의 실시협약

체결 건수(연평균 12.2건)가 폐지된 이후 건수(연평균 5.1건)보다 높았다.

MRG 보장 여부가 수익률과 양의 관계를 보이는 것은 IMF 이후 민간자

본 유치와 경기활성화를 위한 정책적 목적과 경험 부족 및 정보의 비대

칭성 등에 주로 기인한 것으로 보인다.

재정과 민자사업간 추진 방식 비교를 위한 기존 천안논산고속도로 사

후 VFM 분석은 MRG 수준의 하향과 물가하락은 VFM을 개선하지만

할인율과 국고채 금리 하락은 VFM을 나빠지게 하는 것으로 보인다. 분

석 변수에 총사업비, 운영수입, 운영비용, 건설기간, 무상운영기간, 수익

률를 추가하여 보았는 바 특정방식의 우월성을 확인할 수 없었다.

이러한 분석을 통하여 다음과 같은 교훈을 얻을 수 있다. 첫째, MRG

및 민간투자제도와 대한 이해를 폭 넓게 하여야 하며 개별법에 의한 민

간투자사업과 공기업에 의한 사업도 실질적으로 수요 위험 분담이 되고

있기 때문에 수요 검증을 통하여 사업 추진의 효율성을 높일 필요가 있

다. 둘째, 이자율 상승기에 대한 대비가 필요하고 운영사의 출자 참여 유

도와 사업 경쟁 구도가 요망된다, 셋째, 민간투자사업의 향후 발전을 위

해 MRG 등 수요 위험 분담이 이루어진 경우에는 당해 사업의 수익률을

낮추는 등의 정책 지원 조정이 필요한 것으로 보인다. 넷째, 사업추진 방

식에 대한 판단은 추진 당시 여러 변수들의 상황을 보고 판단하여야 하

며 선험적으로 어느 방식이 다른 방식으로 우월하다고 할 수는 없고 실

사구시의 자세가 현실적이다.

향후 해외 실증 연구들이 더 많이 축적되어 우리나라 민간투자사업의

해외진출에 도움이 되기를 바라고 그 동안의 민간투자사업 관련 데이터

들이 누적되고 체계적으로 연구되어 민간투자사업의 의사결정에 실질적

인 도움이 되기를 기대한다.

주요어 : 최소운영수입보장제도(Minimum Revenue Guarantee, MRG),

변천과정, 도입시기, 국제비교, 수익률과 투자유인 영향, 재

정사업과 민자사업 사례 비교.

학 번 : 2010-30692
-
dc.description.tableofcontents목 차

제 1 장 서론 ·········································································· 1

제 1 절 연구 배경과 필요성 ·························································· 1

제 2 절 연구 질문 ············································································· 3

제 2 장 선행연구의 검토 ··················································· 5

제 3 장 연구분석틀과 방법론 ·········································· 7

제 4 장 최소운영수입보장제도 분석 ······························ 9

제 1 절 우리나라 민간투자제도의 변천과정 ····························· 9

1. 민간투자사업 정의 및 추진절차 ······················································· 9

2. 전통적 4단계 분류 ············································································· 14

3. 4단계 분류의 문제점과 새로운 분류의 도입 필요성 ················· 16

제 2 절 최소운영수입보장제도 도입 시기 ··································· 20

1. 도입시기에 대한 상반된 의견과 새로운 도입시기 고찰 필요 ···· 20

2. 다른 법률상의 최소운영수입보장제도 ··········································· 24

3. 도입시기에 대한 새로운 견해 ······················································· 29

제 3 절 민간투자법상 MRG 제도의 변천과정과 시사점 ·· 31

1. 최소운영수입보장 현황 ····································································· 31

2. 최소운영수입보장제도의 변천과정 ················································· 42

3. 부산신항만 사례 분석 ······································································· 46

4. 최소운영수입보장제도의 보완을 위한 새로운 제도 도입 ········· 49

5. 변천과정상의 특징과 시사점 ··························································· 56

제 4 절 민간투자제도 및 최소운영수입보장제도의 국제 비교 ·· 61

1. 해외 민간투자제도 분류 ··································································· 61

2. 해외 최소운영수입보장제도 사례 ··················································· 66

3. 우리나라 민간투자제도와 비교 및 특징 ······································· 69- iv -

제 5 장 MRG 제도와 민간투자사업과의 관계 ········· 74

제 1 절 분석모형 ············································································· 74

제 2 절 자료 ····················································································· 76

제 3 절 분석 결과 ··········································································· 78

1. 시설유형별, 시기별 MRG 사업의 특징 ········································ 78

2. 다중회귀분석모형 추정 결과 ··························································· 81

3. 이항선택모형 추정 결과 ································································· 84

제 4 절 요약 및 시사점 ································································ 87

제 6 장 민자사업과 재정사업 사례 비교 ··················· 93

제 1 절 기존 재정 방식과 민자 방식 비교 연구 ················ 93

1. 추정 수요와 실제 수요의 불일치 문제 ········································· 94

2. 민자도로의 과도한 통행료 문제 ·······················································98

3 최소운영수입보장으로 인한 재정부담 증가 문제 ························· 100

4. 재정사업과 민자사업 추진 비교 사례 ········································· 103

제 2 절 재정 방식과 민자 방식 비교 변수 및 특징 ·········· 106

1. 총사업비 및 건설기간에서 민자사업과 민자사업 추진 특징 ··· 108

2. 운영수입과 운영비용에서의 재정사업과 민자사업 추진 특징 ·· 110

3. 수익률의 경우 재정사업과 민자사업 추진 특징 ······················· 113

제 3 절 요약 및 시사점 ······························································ 115

제 7 장 결론 ····································································· 117

제 1 절 연구의 요약 ···································································· 117

제 2 절 정책적 시사점과 향후 연구 방향 ····························· 124

참고문헌 ············································································· 128

Abstract ············································································· 133- v -

표 목 차

[표 4-1] 수익형 민자사업(BTO, 정부고시사업) ·········································10

[표 4-2] 수익형 민자사업 (BTO, 민간제안사업) ·····································11

[표 4-3] 임대형 민자사업(BTL 정부고시사업) ·········································12

[표 4-4] 임대형 민자사업(BTL 민간제안사업) ·········································13

[표 4-5] 민간투자제도 변천과정과 특성 ······················································19

[표 4-6] 최소운영수입보장제도 관련 규정이 도입·운영되고 있는 여타 법률·· 24

[표 4-7] MRG 있는 사업 현황 (2015년까지 지급액) ································31

[표 4-8] 사업별 MRG 기간, 조건 현황 ························································34

[표 4-9] 사업별 MRG 기간, 조건 현황(계속) ·············································35

[표 4-10] 사업별 MRG 기간, 조건 현황(계속) ···········································36

[표 4-11] 사업별 MRG 기간, 조건 현황(계속) ···········································37

[표 4-12] 사업별 MRG 발생 원인 ·································································38

[표 4-13] 사업별 MRG 발생 원인(계속) ······················································39

[표 4-14] 사업별 MRG 발생 원인(계속) ······················································40

[표 4-15] 사업별 MRG 발생 원인(계속) ······················································41

[표 4-16] 최소운영수입보장제도의 변천과정 ··············································42

[표 4-17] 투자위험분담금 산정 방식 ····························································45

[표 4-18] 부산신항만 출자자 변경 내역 ······················································48

[표 4-19] 자금 재조달을 통한 MRG 완화 현황 ·········································50

[표 4-20] 대구-부산 고속도로 자금 재조달 내용 ······································51

[표 4-21] 민간투자 재정지원 방식 비교 ······················································52

[표 4-22] 사업재구조화를 통한 MRG 완화현황 ·········································52

[표 4-23] 부산-거제간 연결도로의 사업 재구조화 내용 ··························54

[표 4-24] 새로운 사업방식(BTO-rs & BTO-a) 도입 구조 ····················55

[표 4-25] 민간투자법의 투자비용 및 운용이익 현재가치 산식 ··············57

[표 4-26] 민간투자제도 변천과정별 수요위험분담 특징 ··························73

[표 5-1] MRG 대상 민간투자사업의 현황 ···················································77

[표 5-2] 시설유형 내 개별 사업간 상관계수 ··············································79

[표 5-3] 민간투자사업 수익률 스프레드 결정요인 분석 ··························81- vi -

[표 5-4] MRG 보장 여부에 따른 민간투자사업 수익률 스프레드 분석···············82

[표 5-5] MRG 보장기간에 따른 민간투자사업 수익률 스프레드 분석··············83

[표 5-6] MRG 보장 민간투자사업 결정요인 분석 ·····································85

[표 5-7] MRG 제도 폐지 전후의 민간제안 사업 추이 ·····························86

[표 5-8] 분석 대상 시설유형별 민간투자사업 목록 ··································90

[표 5-9] 분석 대상 시설유형별 민간투자사업 목록(계속) ·······················91

[표 5-10] 분석 대상 시설유형별 민간투자사업 목록(계속) ·····················92

[표 6-1] 민자고속도로 통행량 현황 ······························································95

[표 6-2] 2000년 이후 개통된 재정투자 고속도로의 예측 대비 실측 교통량··· 96

[표 6-3] 예측교통량과 실제교통량 격차 발생원인 ····································97

[표 6-4] 주요 공기업 부채현황 ······································································99

[표 6-5] 각 연도별 총민간투자비 및 MRG 지급현황 ·····························101

[표 6-6] 각 연도별 총민간투자비 및 MRG 지급현황(계속) ··················102

[표 6-7] 민자사업을 선택하는 경우 ····························································103

[표 6-8] 최초협약 대비 현 시점의 단계별 VFM 변화 ···························106

[표 6-9] 재정고속도로와 민자고속도로의 총사업비 비교 ······················108

[표 6-10] 재정고속도로와 민자고속도로의 건설기간 비교 ····················109

[표 6-11] 관리운영권 설정기간 만료 사업(2016.5월 말 기준) ··············112

[표 6-12] BTO사업 및 BTL사업의 관리운영권만료 예정 사업 현황············112

[표 6-13] 민자 고속도로 실시협약체결일과 세전실질수익률 현황·············114

그 림 목 차

[그림 1-1] 민간투자사업에 대한 설문조사 결과 ··········································2

[그림 3-1] 최소운영수입보장제도 분석 개요 ················································7

[그림 5-1] 시설유형별 스프레드와 MRG 보장기간 ···································79

[그림 5-2] MRG 대상 사업의 수익률 스프레드 분포 ·······························80

[그림 5-3] MRG 대상이 아닌 사업의 수익률 스프레드 분포 ·················80
-
dc.language.isokor-
dc.publisher서울대학교 대학원-
dc.subject.ddc350.0001-
dc.title한국의 민간투자사업에 대한 비판적 고찰-
dc.title.alternativeAnalytical observation of public-private partnerships in Korea-
dc.typeThesis-
dc.typeDissertation-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthorAHN SANGYEOL-
dc.description.degreeDoctor-
dc.contributor.affiliation행정대학원 정책학과-
dc.date.awarded2019-02-
dc.identifier.uciI804:11032-000000155402-
dc.identifier.holdings000000000026▲000000000039▲000000155402▲-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share