저신뢰 사회를 만드는 고신뢰 기대? 가족확장성과 신뢰기준의 역할

허용회,박선웅,허태균 한국문화및사회문제심리학회 2017 한국심리학회지: 문화 및 사회문제 Vol.23 No.1

The present research investigated the psychological nature of low levels of trust in Korean society and the role of family expansionism, a cultural psychological factor, in this phenomenon. Specifically, we examined the possibility that Koreans’ distrust toward social system is, at least partially, due to high standards for trust, which might be closely related to Koreans’ cultural characteristic of family expansionism. In Study 1, the relations between levels of family expansionism, trust standards, and actual levels of trust for parents, judiciary, and politicians were examined among 540 Korean adults. In Study 2, we manipulated levels of family expansionism to examine its effect on trust standards. Results showed that trust standards were higher for politicians than parents. Participants’ trust standards for politics were unrealistically high, especially on the responsibility factor. Actual levels of trust for judiciary and politicians were low when the trust standards for these targets relative to trust standards for parents were high. Moreover, the trust standards and levels of trust for judiciary and politicians (relative to those for parents) were positively correlated to levels of family expansionism. In other words, higher levels of family expansionism were linked to higher trust standards and levels of distrust for judiciary and politicians. In addition, Study 2 results showed that trust standards became high when family expansionism was induced. Unlike previous studies which focused on causes of low levels of trust while assuming that Korean society itself is a low trust society, the present research investigated the underlying mechanism behind the seemingly low trust in Korean society. 본 연구에서는 한국 사회에 대한 저신뢰 평가에 기여하는 문화심리적 요인을 규명하고자 하였다. 특히 저신뢰 평가가 한국인 스스로 높은 신뢰 기준을 가지고 있는 것에 귀인될 가능성을 확인하였으며, 그 신뢰판단의 기준을 형성하는 데 한국의 문화심리적 특성인 가족확장성(Korean Family Expansionism)이 어떠한 역할을 하는지 확인하였다. 구체적으로 연구 1에서는 540명의 한국 성인에게 부모, 사법부 및 정치인에 대한 신뢰의 기준 및 실제 신뢰 정도와 그들의 가족확장성을 측정하여, 그 관계를 분석하였고, 연구 2에서는 가족확장성을 활성화시키는 처치가 신뢰기준에 미치는 영향을 확인하였다. 연구 결과, 정치인에 대한 신뢰 기준은 부모에 대한 신뢰 기준보다 더 높았고, 특히 관계(친밀성)요인이 아닌 대상(책임성)요인에서 정치와 사법 현실을 고려할 때 일반인들이 정치에 대해 가지고 있는 기대가 다소 비현실적임을 확인할 수 있었다. 부모에 대한 신뢰기준에 비해 정치인이나 사법부에 대한 신뢰의 기준이 상대적으로 높을수록, 실제 그들에 대한 신뢰정도도 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 더 나아가, 사법부 및 정치인에 대한 상대적 신뢰 수준/기준(부모 대비)은 가족확장성과 정적상관을 보였다. 즉, 가족확장성이 높을수록 부모에 비해 사법부/정치인에 대한 더 높은 신뢰 기준을 가지고 있었으며, 이들에 대한 불신 또한 높았다. 또한 연구 2에서는 가족확장성을 활성화시켰을 때 신뢰의 기준이 높아지는 결과를 확인하였다. 한국사회가 저신뢰 사회라는 전제 하에 그 원인을 밝히려는 기존의 연구와 달리, 본 연구에서는 저신뢰 사회라는 인식이 형성되는 이유와 그 속에서 가족확장성이라는 문화심리적 요인이 가지는 의미와 역할을 규명하여 한국 사회의 신뢰 현상의 심층적 의미를 논하였다.

상속세 및 증여세법상 수익자연속신탁 과세제도-일본과의 비교법적 검토를 중심으로-

황헌순 한국세무학회 2021 세무학 연구 Vol.38 No.1

In the past, trusts commonly not were used as a means of property management in Korea. However, the demand of trust is increased as a means of rational property management In the face of economic growth and an aging society. So trust law completely revised in 2011. As a result, new trust system are imposed for example Living trust for will substitute and Beneficiary Consecutive Trust. The situation of legislation is similar in Japan. It is a kind of welfare trust or family trust in case of Beneficiary Consecutive Trust. In the case of Japan, the review of the relevant tax system was discussed along with the revision of the trust law. But it is pointed out that the readjustment of the tax system was insufficient in Korea. This paper reviews the case of Japan, which has a similar legal system with Korea for Beneficiary Consecutive Trust. From this point, consider the differences between the two countries and the implications or points that we can get from Japan’s case. From this study, it makes the difference below;first, Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act uses the concept about trusts with successive beneficiaries same as trust law’s meaning. It assume change of beneficiaries only by former beneficiaries death. Second, there is the no regulation Term of existence of trust in trust Law. From this situation, taxpayer can try various things for example deferral of tax and so on. So the consideration needs to discuss for tax-avoidance. Third, the difference in timing of gift in trust beneficiary rights is needed to consider. it is different compare with Japan system. Taxpayers can try to avoiding progressive tax rates by setting numerous beneficiaries. For these things, we need to check other countries examples. Japan and US’s example will help for it. and we need to think about concept and case of trusts with successive beneficiaries and timing of gift in trust beneficiary rights by considering Japan’s system. The purpose of legislation in Japan is prevention of tax avoidance and vitalization of newly imposed trusts system. And we need to consider consistency with other tax law and tax respite system. In our case, it is necessary to refer to Japan’s case of similar legislation in addition to its own efforts for the use of the newly introduced trust system and prevention of tax avoidance. 과거 우리나라에서는 상사신탁 이외의 신탁이 재산관리 수단으로써 보편적으로 활용되지는 않았다. 하지만, 최근 고령화시대에 접어드는 등 사회적 수요에 따라 합리적 재산관리의 수단으로써 신탁에 대한 수요가 증가했다. 전면개정된 현행 신탁법은 위와 같은 수요에 부응하기 위하여 유언대용신탁, 수익자연속신탁 등 새로운 신탁유형을 규정하게 되었다. 조세와 관련해서는 수익자연속신탁을 설정한 결과, 위탁자 사망 후의 상황에 대한 논의가 행해지므로 상속세와 증여세가 깊이 관련될 것이다. 하지만 우리의 경우 신탁법 개정시에 세제는 그에 수반하여 충분히 개정되지 않은 측면이 있다고 지적된다. 이에 본고는 상속세 및 증여세법상 수익자연속신탁에 대해 우리나라와 유사한 법개정 경위를 가진 일본과의 비교법적 고찰을 중심으로 논의한다. 이로부터 다음과 같은 사항들을 살펴볼 수 있다. 첫째, 현행 상속세 및 증여세법은 수익자연속신탁의 개념에 대해 신탁법의 개념을 차용하고 있으며, 신탁법에서는 사망으로 인해 수익자가 변경되는 경우만을 상정하고 있다는 문제점이 있다. 둘째, 신탁법상 수익자연속신탁 규정을 보면, 당해 신탁의 존속기간에 관한 규정이 없다. 신탁법상 논의 뿐만 아니라 세법에서도 수익자연속신탁의 존속기간 부재로 인해 납세자는 신탁을 활용함으로써 장기간의 과세이연, 혹은 신탁계약에 따라서는 신탁원본에 대한 과세가 일어나지 않도록 할 수도 있을 것이다. 이러한 신탁으로 인해 발생하는 조세회피를 방지하기 위해서는 존속기간 제한규정이 필요하다. 셋째, 현행 상속세 및 증여세법은 신탁수익권의 과세시기에 대해 수익실현시과세방식을 취하고 있다. 이때, 한 명의 수익자가 수익을 받는 경우에 비해 위탁자가 상속세 및 증여세법상의 누진세율의 적용을 회피하기 위해 다수의 수익자를 설정해 둠에 따른 조세회피도 고려해야 한다. 이러한 문제의식에 대한 검토 결과 첫째, 수익자연속신탁에 있어 사망 이외의 방법으로 수익자가 변경되는 경우를 고려하여 세법을 마련할 필요가 있다. 둘째, 수익자연속신탁의 존속기간과 관련해서는 일본과 미국의 경우 신탁에 대한 존속기간을 법에서 규정해 두고 있으므로 위에서 언급한 문제에 대해 보다 효율적으로 대비할 수 있을 것이며, 우리도 지나친 장기간의 과세이연, 조세부과의 불가능성 등을 고려할 때, 외국과 같은 입법조치가 필요하다. 셋째, 신탁수익권 과세시기의 문제에 있어서

부동산 신탁에 있어서의 소유자

송재우 부산대학교 법학연구소 2020 법학연구 Vol.61 No.2

Trust means that a truster transfers a specific property to a trustee according to the trust agreement so that a trustee will manage. develop, operate, mortgage and/or dispose the trusted property for the benefit of a beneficiary, or for the purpose agreed upon the trust agreement. The ownership of the trusted property shall be transferred from the truster to the trustee upon the trust agreement, but the trustee shall perform trusted property with due fiduciary care. The courts have decided that the full ownership of the trusted property is held by the trustee, but there also are some judicial precedents and administrative interpretations that the truster still holds the ownership of the trusted property irrespective of the trust. However, such interpretation that the truster holds the ownership is not supported by the sufficient legal basis. The interpretation shall be kept as the trustee to be the only one to enjoy the full ownership of the trusted property legally. Any potential matter in the trust shall be handled within the scope of the regulations and practises of the trust system and be also resolved on maintaining the assumption that the owner of the trusted property is the trustee.

신탁의 경제적 분석

이계정 법조협회 2020 法曹 Vol.69 No.4

The structures of the law of trusts can be divided into two kinds of structure, interior and external. The interior structure is related to the relationships among the parties of the trust including beneficiary and how to control the power of the trustee. The external structure is mainly related to the insolvency protection of the trust estate and the rescission right, entitling the beneficiary to rescind the transaction between the trustee and the third party in a case where the transaction has been proved to breach the trust purpose. This article made an economic analysis on the law of trusts by looking into the interior structure and the external structure and the conclusion can be summarized as follows: Firstly, the law of trusts developed the regime of the fiduciary duty to mitigate the agency cost. In addition, disgorgement of profits can be said to be economically efficient means to discourage the trustee from committing wrongdoing by internalizing an externality. The trustee’s duty to inform and the minimization of the trustee’s discretionary powers can be evaluated as strategies to lessen the agency cost. Secondly, according to the Coase theorem the minimization of the transaction cost should be foremostly considered to achieve efficiency in establishing the legal principle and policy. The law of trusts established the scheme to reduce the transaction cost by incorporating the regime of the fiduciary duty into the contract and prescribing the default rules that people would have been negotiated if the costs of negotiating at arm’s length for every contingency were sufficiently low. Additionally, no-further-inquiry rule and the rule of the presumption can be helpful for lessening the decision cost. Thirdly, the insolvency protection of the trust estate and the separateness of the trust estate can be economically justified given that when the third made a contract with the trustee not in his fiduciary capacity but in his individual capacity, the third can be considered as the cheapest cost avoider in comparison to the beneficiary. As Calabresi mentioned, the inalienability rule can be justified when the paternalism is applied. The rescission right is one of the examples of the inalienability rule and economically justified since the paternalism is emphasized for the protection of the beneficiary exposed to a special vulnerability in the law of trusts. Lastly, it is desirable from the perspective of the economics that the trustee should not be personally liable on contracts properly entered into in his fiduciary capacity in the course of administration of the trust estate. Therefore, the Korean trust code stating that the trustee is also personally liable on contracts properly entered into in his fiduciary capacity should be revised for improving the utility of the trust. This paper also made an economic analysis on the limited liability trust under which the trustee shall be responsible for the debts belonging to the trust estate only by the trust estate. 본 논문에서는 신탁의 기본구조를 내부적 관계와 외부적 관계로 나누어 경제적 분석을 시도하여 신탁이 어떻게 효율을 달성하고 있는지를 논하였는데, 그 내용을 요약하면 다음과 같다. 우선 신탁이 대리비용의 문제를 해결하기 위해 수탁자에게 매우 엄격한 의무인 신인의무를 부과하고 있다는 점을 논하였다. 아울러 수탁자에게 이득토출책임을 부과하고 있는데, 외부효과를 내부화하고 수탁자로 하여금 위법행위를 할 유인을 제거하기 위한 제도라는 점에서 이득토출책임이 법경제학적으로 정당화된다는 점을 논증하였다. 수탁자에 대한 정보제공의무 부과, 수탁자의 권한 축소도 대리비용을 줄이기 위한 방안임을 밝혔다. 다음으로 신탁이 거래비용의 문제를 어떻게 해결하였는지를 코즈의 이론을 바탕으로 살펴보았다. 신탁계약을 체결하면 수탁자의 의무를 포괄적으로 표현한 신인의무가 계약에 편입되게 함으로써 거래비용을 줄이고 있으며, 신인의무는 규칙이 아니라 기준에 해당하여 사법비용이 드는바 신인의무의 내용을 구체화한 하위규범, 법원의 심리의 단순화를 위한 심리배제 원칙 등을 통해 사법비용의 감소를 꾀하고 있다는 점을 설명하였다. 아울러 당사자가 거래비용이 없었다면 합의하였을 사항을 신탁법에 규정함으로써 거래비용의 감소를 꾀하고 있음을 밝혔다. 그 다음으로 수탁자의 고유채권자가 최소비용회피자(the cheapest cost avoider)라는 점을 논증함으로써 신탁재산의 독립성과 도산절연기능이 법경제학적으로 정당화된다는 점을 밝혔다. 한편, 수익자취소권은 양도불가규칙(inalienability rule)이 적용된 것인데 수익자가 가지는 취약한 지위로 인하여 신탁의 법률관계에 후견주의가 적용되므로 양도불가규칙의 적용이 정당화된다는 점을 설명하였다. 끝으로 수탁자의 대외적 책임에 관한 경제적 분석을 시도하였는데, 수탁자가 신탁사무 처리와 관련하여 채무를 부담한 경우에 수탁자가 신탁재산만으로 책임을 지게 하는 것이 효율적이고, 현재의 신탁법과 같이 수탁자가 고유재산으로도 책임을 지게 하는 것은 비효율적이라는 점을 설명하였다. 수탁자가 신탁재산으로만 책임을 지기 위해서는 유한책임신탁을 설정하면 되는바, 유한책임신탁의 의의를 경제적 관점에서 분석하였다.

사해신탁취소권의 행사에 관한 법적 고찰

한상곤 경희대학교 법학연구소 2014 경희법학 Vol.49 No.3

It specifies Article 8 Trust Act, the fraudulent trust. For example, the concept of fraudulent trust is if you have set up a trust to know that the debtor (A) is prejudice creditors (B). It is specified that by setting the trust to know that the debtor is an Article 8 consignor trust law is detrimental to creditors, and undermine the appropriate trust relationship. The provisions relating to fraudulent trust of Article 8 Trust Act shall not be defined specifically and prejudicial acts of civil law in the criteria of prejudicial acts. And, there is no content that was specially amended Trust Act as amended in 2009 even compared to trust law prior to the revision. However, that trust law of current is different from the Trust Act prior to the revision, the Trust Act prior to the revision, there was no place that is prescribed in the clear for the other party to be able to exercise right to cancel fraudulent trust. Trust method current is that it has been clearly defined so as to exercise selective beneficiaries or trustees. So, fraudulent trust which are different in certain respects as of creditor right of rescission Civil Code on the fraudulent trust, examined the scope of the exercise with the other party when you exercise the right to cancel fraudulent trust the analysis for this it is necessary. Unlike the Trust Act prior to the revision, trust law of current, protecting the beneficiaries of good faith. However, the provisions of the fraudulent trust of trust law is a necessary complement yet. Transfer claims of beneficial interest is considered to be defined in the clear will be limited to be able to take into account the fairness of the right to cancel fraudulent trust and filed a suit. In addition, and to be able to demand that the transfer of the beneficial interest of restitution claims in the same trust in, creditors of the consignor and right to cancel fraudulent trust selectively with respect to the part of the beneficiary there is a need to organize a clear relationship. That is, it must be made clear to whether it is possible to whether may be exercised selectively transferable claims of beneficial rights right to cancel fraudulent trust is claimed to duplicate it. 신탁법(법률 제12193호, 2014.1.7., 일부개정) 제8조는 ‘사해신탁’이라는 용어를 사용하여 채무자가 채권자를 해함을 알면서 신탁을 설정한 경우를 규율하고 있다. 신탁법 제8조가 규율하는 사해신탁이란 위탁자인 채무자가 채권자를 해함을 알면서 신탁을 설정하는 것으로 올바른 신탁관계를 해하는 것이다. 신탁법 제8조의 사해신탁에 관한 규정은 사해행위의 판단 기준에 있어서 민법상의 사해행위와 달리 특별히 구체적으로 규정하고 있지도 아니하고 2009년의 개정된 신탁법도 개정 전의 신탁법과 비교하여 특별히 변경한 것도 없다. 그러나 현행 신탁법이 舊 신탁법과 다른 점은 舊法은 사해신탁취소권을 행사할 수 있는 상대방에 대하여 명문으로 규정하고 있는 바가 없었지만 현행 「신탁법」은 수탁자 또는 수익자에게 선택적으로 행사할 수 있도록 명백히 규정하고 있다는 점이다. 그래서 신탁행위의 사해행위는 「민법」상의 채권자취소권의 사해행위와는 다른 측면이 있는바 이에 대한 분석과 함께 사해신탁취소권을 행사하는 경우의 상대방 및 그 행사범위에 대해 검토도 필요하다. 현행 신탁법은 舊신탁법과는 달리 선의의 수익자의 보호 문제를 해결하여, 신탁제도를 안정화시켰다. 그러나 신탁법상 사해신탁 규정은 여전히 보완이 필요할 것으로 생각된다. 수익권 양도 청구권과 관련하여 사해신탁취소권과의 형평성을 고려하여 소로써만 제기할 수 있도록 제한하는 것으로 명문으로 규정하여야 할 것으로 생각된다. 또한 동일한 신탁 내에서 위탁자의 채권자가 수익자의 일부에 대하여 선택적으로 사해신탁취소권과 원상회복청구와 수익권의 양도를 청구할 수 있도록 하는 것과의 관계를 명확하게 정리할 필요가 있다. 즉 수익권 양도 청구권과 사해신탁취소의 원상회복청구권을 선택적으로 행사할 수 있는 것인지, 아니면, 이를 중복하여 청구할 수 있되 하나의 청구를 하게 되면 나머지 부분을 공제하는 것인지를 분명하게 정리하는 것이 바람직할 것으로 생각된다. 신탁행위의 특수성을 고려하여 원상회복 시 원물반환의 원칙을 완화하여 적용할 필요성이 있다고 생각된다. 신탁의 경우에는 신탁자산을 기초로 여러 이해관계인이 얽혀 있는 경우가 대부분이므로 원물반환의 원칙을 강조하는 경우 선의의 피해자가 양산될 수 있다. 따라서 단순한 채권자취소권의 경우와는 달리 사해신탁의 경우에는 원물반환의 원칙을 완화하여 해석하는 것이 바람직하다.

The Effect of Mutual Trust on Relational Performance in Supplier-Buyer Relationships for Business Services Transactions

노전표 한국마케팅과학회 2009 마케팅과학연구 Vol.19 No.4

Trust has been studied extensively in psychology, economics, and sociology, and its importance has been emphasized not only in marketing, but also in business disciplines in general. Unlike past relationships between suppliers and buyers, which take considerable advantage of private networks and may involve unethical business practices, partnerships between suppliers and buyers are at the core of success for industrial marketing amid intense global competition in the 21st century. A high level of mutual cooperation occurs through an exchange relationship based on trust, which brings long-term benefits, competitive enhancements, and transaction cost reductions, among other benefits, for both buyers and suppliers. In spite of the important role of trust, existing studies in buy-supply situations overlook the role of trust and do not systematically analyze the effect of trust on relational performance. Consequently, an in-depth study that determines the relation of trust to the relational performance between buyers and suppliers of business services is absolutely needed. Business services in this study, which include those supporting the manufacturing industry, are drawing attention as the economic growth engine for the next generation. The Korean government has selected business services as a strategic area for the development of manufacturing sectors. Since the demands for opening business services markets are becoming fiercer, the competitiveness of the business service industry must be promoted now more than ever. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of the mutual trust between buyers and suppliers on relational performance. Specifically, this study proposed a theoretical model of trust-relational performance in the transactions of business services and empirically tested the hypotheses delineated from the framework. The study suggests strategic implications based on research findings. Empirical data were collected via multiple methods, including via telephone, mail, and in-person interviews. Sample companies were knowledge-based companies supplying and purchasing business services in Korea. The present study collected data on a dyadic basis. Each pair of sample companies includes a buying company and its corresponding supplying company. Mutual trust was traced for each pair of companies. This study proposes a model of trust-relational performance of buying-supplying for business services. The model consists of trust and its antecedents and consequences. The trust of buyers is classified into trust toward the supplying company and trust toward salespersons. Viewing trust both at the individual level and the organizational level is based on the research of Doney and Cannon (1997). Normally, buyers are the subject of trust, but this study supposes that suppliers are the subjects. Hence, it uniquely focused on the bilateral perspective of perceived risk. In other words, suppliers, like buyers, are the subject of trust since transactions are normally bilateral. From this point of view, suppliers’ trust in buyers is as important as buyers’ trust in suppliers. The suppliers’ trust is influenced by the extent to which it trusts the buying companies and the buyers. This classification of trust using an individual level and an organization level is based on the suggestion of Doney and Cannon (1997). Trust affects the process of supplier selection, which works in a bilateral manner. Suppliers are actively involved in the supplier selection process, working very closely with buyers. In addition, the process is affected by the extent to which each party trusts its partners. The selection process consists of certain steps: recognition, information search, supplier selection, and performance evaluation. As a result of the process, both buyers and suppliers evaluate the performance and take corrective actions on the basis of such outcomes as tangible, intangible, and/or side effects. The measurement... Trust has been studied extensively in psychology, economics, and sociology, and its importance has been emphasized not only in marketing, but also in business disciplines in general. Unlike past relationships between suppliers and buyers, which take considerable advantage of private networks and may involve unethical business practices, partnerships between suppliers and buyers are at the core of success for industrial marketing amid intense global competition in the 21st century. A high level of mutual cooperation occurs through an exchange relationship based on trust, which brings long-term benefits, competitive enhancements, and transaction cost reductions, among other benefits, for both buyers and suppliers. In spite of the important role of trust, existing studies in buy-supply situations overlook the role of trust and do not systematically analyze the effect of trust on relational performance. Consequently, an in-depth study that determines the relation of trust to the relational performance between buyers and suppliers of business services is absolutely needed. Business services in this study, which include those supporting the manufacturing industry, are drawing attention as the economic growth engine for the next generation. The Korean government has selected business services as a strategic area for the development of manufacturing sectors. Since the demands for opening business services markets are becoming fiercer, the competitiveness of the business service industry must be promoted now more than ever. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of the mutual trust between buyers and suppliers on relational performance. Specifically, this study proposed a theoretical model of trust-relational performance in the transactions of business services and empirically tested the hypotheses delineated from the framework. The study suggests strategic implications based on research findings. Empirical data were collected via multiple methods, including via telephone, mail, and in-person interviews. Sample companies were knowledge-based companies supplying and purchasing business services in Korea. The present study collected data on a dyadic basis. Each pair of sample companies includes a buying company and its corresponding supplying company. Mutual trust was traced for each pair of companies. This study proposes a model of trust-relational performance of buying-supplying for business services. The model consists of trust and its antecedents and consequences. The trust of buyers is classified into trust toward the supplying company and trust toward salespersons. Viewing trust both at the individual level and the organizational level is based on the research of Doney and Cannon (1997). Normally, buyers are the subject of trust, but this study supposes that suppliers are the subjects. Hence, it uniquely focused on the bilateral perspective of perceived risk. In other words, suppliers, like buyers, are the subject of trust since transactions are normally bilateral. From this point of view, suppliers’ trust in buyers is as important as buyers’ trust in suppliers. The suppliers’ trust is influenced by the extent to which it trusts the buying companies and the buyers. This classification of trust using an individual level and an organization level is based on the suggestion of Doney and Cannon (1997). Trust affects the process of supplier selection, which works in a bilateral manner. Suppliers are actively involved in the supplier selection process, working very closely with buyers. In addition, the process is affected by the extent to which each party trusts its partners. The selection process consists of certain steps: recognition, information search, supplier selection, and performance evaluation. As a result of the process, both buyers and suppliers evaluate the performance and take corrective actions on the basis of such outcomes as tangible, intangible, and/or side effects. The measurement of trus...

토지신탁 수익의 신탁종료 전 지급기준에 대한 검토

김용진 한국부동산연구원 2015 부동산연구 Vol.25 No.3

Land Trust is one of financial investment instruments, Trust company received land itself from land owner, and lead development projects on behalf of the truster as a trustee. In the point of managing the trust assets, Land Trust is actively engaged in the projects in comparison with the other real-estate trust. The land trust was introduced 20years ago but it‘s concept was not clearly established in the regulatory system of trust law. In this regard of this, review the background and purpose of the regulation “the payment criteria for real estate trust returns before the expiration of trusts”. In addition of this, the matters such as the scope of pre-payment, the meaning of land price, the validity of the concept of trust income, was studied during the progress of the development projects. As the result of this, land trust was understanded by one of type of business trust, and this pre-payment regulation need to switch regulation of the prohibiton unfair business practice to regulation of the project safety and soundness. 토지신탁은 토지를 신탁 받아 개발사업을 위탁자를 대신하여 영위하는 신탁이다. 신탁된 자산을 관리, 처분하는데 그치지 않고 적극적으로 사업을 영위하는 형태의 신탁이다. 토지신탁이 도입된 지 20여년이 되었으나, 신탁과 관련된 규정체계에서 토지신탁이 가지는 위치나, 개념 정립에 대하여서는 명료하게 규명되어 정리된 바가 없다. 이와 관련하여 토지신탁의 신탁종료 전 신탁수익의 지급 규정과 관련한 도입배경, 입법연혁을 검토하여 이 규정의 도입 취지와 배경을 살펴보았다. 또한 현행 개발사업의 진행시 이 규정과 관련한 문제들을 선지급 대상의 범위, 토지비의 개념, 신탁 수익의 개념의 타당성과 그 지급대상 순서로 검토하여 보았다. 이에 사업형 신탁으로서 토지신탁의 성격을 파악하고, 기존 선지급 규제를 재산상 이익제공과 관련한 불건전영업행위 규제 대신 각 개발사업의 건전성을 검토하여 그 위험 정도에 따라 토지 원리금 상환 재원을 마련하는 건전성 규제로 전환할 필요성을 주장하였다.

신탁비송사건절차에 관한 검토

전병서 사단법인 한국신탁학회 2022 신탁연구 Vol.4 No.2

The Trust Act, which lays down rules on trusts, was entirely amended by Act No. 10924 of July 25, 2011, and has been enforced since July 26, 2012. As the amended Trust Act created and modified trial-related rules concerning dismissal of trustee and appointment of new trustee, appointment and dismissal of administrator of trust property and trust administrators, devolution of property caused by adjunction to trust property, call for beneficiaries’ meetings, modification of trusts, determination of the purchase price of the right to benefit, termination of trusts, and others, the Non-Contentious Case Procedure Act was amended by Act No. 11827 of May 28, 2013 in order to organise specific procedural regulations, such as the holder of the right to apply and methods of objection, for the aforementioned trials. The Non-Contentious Case Procedure Act, in Part Ⅱ Non-Contentious Civil Cases, Chapter Ⅱ Cases Relating to Trusts, which prescribes cases in terms of the Trust Act, including judgment on termination of trust created by declaration of trust for wrongful purposes following Article 3(3) of the Trust Act, judgment on permission to resign as trustee following Article 14(2) of the Trust Act, judgment on dismissal of trustees following Article 42 of the Trust Act, and judgment on appointment of trust property administrators following Article 17(1) of the Trust Act, following the order of articles of the Trust Act, lays down rules on vindications, hearings, hearings of statement, additional statements of the grounds, immediate appeals, suspensions of execution of the trial, restrictions on filing appeals, etc. Due to the aforementioned amendments of the Trust Act and the Non-Contentious Case Procedure Act, there is a need to clarify the procedures of the non-contentious cases relating to trusts. But, as this paper aims at providing general examination of the procedures of the non-contentious cases relating to trusts following the amendments of the two Acts, full-scale analysis on each issue taking the form of a research paper will not be conducted. If the Trust Act absorbs and lays down rules on the procedures of the non-contentious cases relating to trusts in the future, proper regulations of procedure presupposing substantive trust law would be made possible. Only the rules concerning competence can be prescribed by the Trust Act, while other rules of the Non-Contentious Case Procedure Act can be applied mutatis mutandis. If there is a need to make a special modification, exceptional articles can be prescribed in the Trust Act. 신탁을 규율하는 신탁법은 2011. 7. 25. 법률 제10924호로 전부 개정되었고, 1년 뒤인 2012. 7. 26.부터 시행되고 있다. 이 새로운 신탁법에서 수탁자의 해임 및 신수탁자의 선임, 신탁재산관리인 및 신탁관리인의 선임ㆍ해임, 신탁재산의 첨부로 인한 재산의 귀속, 수익자집회의 소집, 신탁의 변경, 수익권 매수가액의 결정, 신탁종료 등에 대한 재판과 관련된 내용이 신설ㆍ변경됨에 따라 그 재판에 관하여 신청권자, 불복방법 등 구체적인 재판절차규정을 정비하고자 하는 취지에서 2013. 5. 28. 법률 제11827호로 비송사건절차법의 개정이 있었다. 신탁법상 비송사건은 비송사건절차법 제2편 민사비송사건, 제2장 신탁에 관한 사건에서, 신탁법상 조문 순서에 따라 신탁법 제3조 제3항에 따른 자기신탁 종료 명령사건,신탁법 제14조 제2항에 따른 수탁자의 사임허가 및 신탁법 제42조에 따른 수탁자 해임사건, 신탁법 제17조 제1항에 따른 신탁재산관리인선임사건 등으로 소명, 심문, 진술의 청취, 이유의 부기, 즉시항고, 원재판의 집행정지, 불복신청의 제한 등에 대하여 규율하고 있다. 위와 같이 신탁법 및 비송사건절차법의 개정에 기하여 신탁비송사건의 절차를 분명히 할 필요가 생겼다. 다만, 본 글에서는 위 양 법률의 개정에 따른 신탁비송사건의 절차를 개괄적으로 살펴보는 것에 그치고자 한다. 앞으로 신탁비송사건절차를 신탁법 자체에서 흡수하여 규율한다면, 신탁 실체법을 전제로 적절한 절차적 규율이 전개될 수 있을 것이다. 이 경우에 신탁법에서 관할 부분만을 따로 규율하면서 나머지 규율은 비송사건절차법을 준용하면 되고, 특별히 변경을 가하고자 한다면, 신탁법에서 그 특례를 규율하면 될 것이다.

인터넷 경매의 신뢰형성요인과 경매참여의도에 관한 연구

이호근(Ho Geun Lee),이승창(Seung Chang Lee),강훈철(Hun Chul Kang) 한국경영학회 2003 經營學硏究 Vol.32 No.1

Trust has been identified as a key component in many marketing and e-Commerce studies. Research on the trust has so far focused on Internet shopping mall, but have scarcely looked at trust of Internet auction sites. The purpose of this study is to find out which factors play a major role in building trust in C2C internet auction and how the built-up trust affect consumer’s participation in Internet auction. The research model investigates what factors influence Internet auction’s site’s trust. Furthermore, the research is designed to understand how the level of trust perceived by buyers influences participating intention. The trust in Internet auction consists of two types of trust: one is the trust on Internet auction site itself and the other is the trust on sellers. Based on the social network theory and the trust theory, our research model includes factors such as a buyer’s propensity-to-trust, institutional characteristics, perceived reputation, perceived size of Internet auction site, and perceived benefit. This study demonstrates that buyers’ trust has significant effects on the intention of auction participation. We have also found that trust can be transferred from auction site to sellers. We call this phenomenon trust transference effect’. This study shows that perceived benefits of Internet auction explain only a little portion of auction participation. Although buyers recognize the benefits of Internet auction, they would not participate in Internet auction without trust on the auction site. Thus an institutional mechanism to increase the trust of auction site should be an important strategy for Internet auction business.

조세감면규정에 대한 신뢰보호원칙 ― 친환경주택 취득세 감면규정을 중심으로 ―

조현석 서울시립대학교 서울시립대학교 법학연구소 2022 조세와 법 Vol.15 No.2

Today, the state uses tax reduction and exemption regulations as a policy. These regulations are revised more frequently than others, and the need to protect the trust of taxpayers comes to the fore. The 「Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act」 often has general transitional measures, and Supreme Court precedents on trust protection in cases where there are general transitional measures are accumulating. However, these tax regulations are usually regulated as sunset clauses with a sunset period, and, by their nature, the state induces taxpayers for certain action, so when applying the trust protection principle, they should be comprehensively compared and weighed. There does not seem to be a Supreme Court ruling on how to determine the protection of the taxpayer's confidence when a sunset deadline exists, but the some lower court ruling that does not recognize the protection of the taxpayer's trust. However, since the major principle of the trust protection principle is to compare the balance between private interest and public interest, the sunset deadline is just one of the factors to be considered. One should not deny the need to protect the trust of taxpayers so easily. Another consideration of the trust protection principle is the nature of taxation. The precedents tend to recognize the taxpayers' legitimate trust when a preparation period is required from the causal act to satisfy certain tax conditions, and need an extra period to satisfy the tax conditions, such as acquisition tax. On the contrary, when tax conditions don't require certain period, the precedents tend not to recognize the need to protect the trust of the taxpayer. When a general transitional measure exists, the Supreme Court said that the trust of the taxpayer is protected when “causal acts are closely related to the satisfaction of tax requirements”. But, the court also has a rather ambiguous explanation that “the details of reduction or exemption for a specific period in the future must be specified in the previous regulation”. However, the emphasis should be on the 'causal action' and not on the 'specified period in the future'. Because, the “specified period in the future” is just the period from the 'causal action' to the establishment of tax requirements Reduction for buildings certified as the Green Architecture reduces the acquisition tax when a certain energy reduction rate is met. The taxpayer must submit an energy saving plan to the permitting authority, and the business plan will be approved only when the energy saving rate is higher than a certain rate. It can be seen as a causal act closely related to the fulfillment of tax requirements. As the taxpayer have no choice but to design the building according to the energy reduction rate requirement, the taxpayer's trust protection value is quite high. And, beacause the sunset deadline of the regulations has been extended, protecting taxpayers trust would make the regulation more reliable, so it is good to the public interest. Thus, the taxpayer's trust in the reduction regulations at the time of approval of the Green Architecture business plan approval should be protected. 오늘날 국가는 조세감면을 정책적으로 사용하고 있다. 이러한 조세감면규정은 정책적 이유로 일반적인 법령보다는 자주 개정되는데, 여기서 납세의무자의 신뢰보호 필요성이 대두된다. 「지방세특례제한법」 등은 일반적 경과규정을 두는 경우가 많고, 일반적 경과규정이 있는 경우의 신뢰보호에 관한 대법원 판례들도 누적되고 있다. 그런데 이러한 조세감면규정은 대개 일몰기한이 있는 일몰조항으로 규정되고, 특성상 국가가 납세자의 행위를 유도하는 규정이므로 신뢰보호원칙을 적용할 때 이를 종합적으로 비교형량하여야 한다. 아직 일몰기한이 존재하는 경우, 어떻게 납세의무자의 신뢰보호를 판단할 것인지에 대한 대법원 판결은 없는 것으로 보이는데, 하급심 판결 중 일몰기한이 존재하는 경우 납세의무자의 신뢰보호를 인정하지 않고 있는 것이 보인다. 그런데 신뢰보호원칙의 대원칙은 사익과 공익의 비교형량이므로, 일몰기한도 비교형량 시 하나의 고려요소에 불과하다. 특히 일몰기한이 연장되어 공익을 해한다고 보기 어려운 경우 및 종전 규정에 의하여 납세의무자의 행위가 유도되어 납세의무자의 신뢰보호 필요성이 높은 경우가 존재하는데, 이 경우 일몰기한이 존재한다는 이유만으로 쉽사리 납세의무자의 신뢰보호 필요성을 부정하여서는 안 될 것이다. 신뢰보호원칙의 고려사항으로는 조세의 성격도 있다. 조세감면규정에서 신뢰보호원칙에 관한 대법원 판례는 취득세와 같이 일정한 과세요건 충족을 위한 원인행위 이후 과세요건의 충족까지 준비기간이 필요한 경우 납세의무자의 신뢰보호를 인정해주는 경향이 강하고, 과세요건 충족에 별다른 기간을 요하지 않는 양도행위에 대한 세금에는 납세의무자의 신뢰를 보호하여 주지 않는 경향이 있는 것으로 확인된다. 일반적 경과규정이 존재하는 경우, 납세의무자가 종전 규정을 신뢰하여 신뢰보호문제가 발생하였을 때, 대법원은 “과세요건 충족에 밀접하게 관련된 원인행위”를 한 경우에는 납세의무자에 대한 신뢰를 보호하여 준다고 하는 법리를 확립하여 왔는데, 더불어 “종전 규정에 장래 특정한 기간 동안의 감면 내용이 명시”되어야 한다는 다소 모호한 설시도 같이 하고 있어서, 이에 대한 고찰이 필요하다. 이때 방점은 ‘원인행위’에 있고, ‘장래 특정한 기간’에 있지 않다고 본다. 결국 ‘장래 특정한 기간’이란 과세요건 충족에 밀접하게 관련된 원인행위 이후 과세요건 충족까지의 기간에 불과한 것으로 보이기 때문이다. 친환경주택 감면규정은 일정한 에너지절감율 이상일 것을 감면요건으로 하여 취득세를 감면하여 준다. 납세의무자는 허가권자에게 규정상 에너지절약계획서(친환경주택 성능평가서)를 제출하여야 하고, 일정한 에너지절감율 이상인 경우에만 사업계획승인을 받게 되는데, 에너지절감율을 반영한 건축물설계는 쉽게 바꿀 수 없다는 점에서, 이를 과세요건의 충족과 밀접하게 관련된 원인행위라고 볼 수 있다. 납세의무자로서도 해당 시점의 감면요건(에너지절감율)에 따라 건축물을 설계할 수밖에 없을 것이므로, 이때의 취득세 감면규정에 대한 납세의무자의 신뢰보호가치는 상당히 높다. 여기에 친환경주택에 대한 감면규정의 일몰기한이 연장되며 계속 존속되고 있는 점을 더하여 보면, 납세의무자에게 취득세 감면 혜택을 주는 것은 국가의 유도를 더욱 원활히 하는 것으로서 ...