신탁법상 수탁자의 파산과 수익자의 보호 = The Bankruptcy of a Trustee in Korean Trust Law

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Trust, which is known as a unique product of the English legal system, has been transplanted into Korea in the form of the statute in 1961. Although Korea belongs to one of the "civil law" countries, the differences of the two legal systems have not been debated a lot. The author argues that we need to focus on the differences and try to make the trust more adaptable to the civil law principles.
One of the problems which hold the directions for the argument is related to the bankruptcy of the trustee. Korean trust code stipulates that the trust property does not belong to the bankruptcy estate(§ 22). It also declares that the trustee's creditors cannot levy or execute the trust property(§ 21). However, it is not easy to explain this result, because it basically says that some part of a person's property does not liable to her creditors' claims. In Anglo-american law, the trust property does not belong to the bankruptcy estate because the equitable title to the trust property belongs to the beneficiary. As we do not know the law/equity dichotomy in Korea, we cannot accept that explanation. The author argues that we need to start to ask who has the ownership of the trust estate. His answer to this problem is that the owner of the trust property is not the beneficiary but the trustee. According to the Korean property law, the ownership cannot be divided into two different legal entities. Even though the trustee cannot take advantage of the trust property, she is still the owner of the trust estate, as the flexibility of the concept of the ownership allows it. As a result, the nature of the beneficiary's right is not proprietary, but only obligatory.
When you clear the ownership problem, the next question would be that how to explain the rules of §§ 21, 22(bankruptcy problem). The author argues that the concept of the "separate patrimony" would be a good candidate for the solution. The "separate patrimony" means that some part of the property is separated from other part and becomes available for the execution of the creditors who are related to that separated property. Because we already have the institute in our own civil code and the bankruptcy code, it is relatively easy to apply this concept to the trust situation. As the trust property is the "separate patrimony" within the patrimony in the name of the trustee, the creditors of the trustee cannot levy or execute the trust property and the bankruptcy trustee cannot manage or dispose of the trust property.
Lastly, the author suggests the ground of the right to recover the trust property. When the bankruptcy trustee tries to dispose of the trust property, the beneficiary would be the appropriate person to stop the process with the right to restore the trust property. However, the author contends that it would not be easy to interpret that the beneficiary has the right, because (1) the Korean trust code does not give the right in express terms, and (2) the "right to return" in the bankruptcy code is only allowed to the proprietary rights in principle. The author suggests the new trust code include the article which gives the beneficiary the right to restore the trust property.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 金相容, "양도담보의 법적 구성 in: 민사판례평석(1)" 법원사 333-, 1995

2 김성필, "신탁재산의 재산관계" (17) : 205-, 1999

3 崔 秀 貞, "신탁법상의 상계" 중앙법학회 9 (9): 119-147, 2007

4 李時潤, "신민사집행법(제3판)"

5 서울신탁은행, "서울신탁은행삼십년사"

6 "서울고등법원 1979. 3. 2. 선고 78나2890 판결(확정)"

7 裵錫, "부동산의 선의취득자 보호" 31 (31): 8-, 1982

8 梁彰洙, "부동산물권변동에 관한 판례의 동향" 1 : 203

9 "민법 제272조 참조"

10 高翔龍, "명의신탁의 법리 소고(2)" 32 (32): -43, 1991

11 "독일 구 파산법 제47조"

12 "독일 구 파산법 제43조"

13 전병서, "도산법(제2판)" 法文社 291-292, 2007

14 "대법원 2006. 10. 13. 선고 2006다23138 판결"

15 "대법원 2004. 4. 28. 선고 2003다61542 판결"

16 "대법원 2004. 10. 15. 선고 2004다31883 판결"

17 "대법원 2003. 5. 27. 선고 2000다73445 판결"

18 "대법원 2003. 11. 14. 선고 2003다30968 판결"

19 "대법원 2002. 7. 26. 선고 2000다17070 판결"

20 "대법원 2002. 4. 12. 선고 2000다70460 판결"

21 "대법원 2002. 3. 15. 선고 2002다52141 판결"

22 "대법원 2001. 3. 27. 선고 2000다26920 판결"

23 "대법원 1997. 8. 26. 선고 97다4401"

24 "대법원 1994. 10. 14. 선고 93다62119 판결"

25 "대법원 1991. 8. 13. 선고 91다12608 판결"

26 "대법원 1990. 4. 24. 선고 89다카18884 판결"

27 "대법원 1988. 4. 25. 선고 87다카2696, 2697 판결"

28 "대법원 1979. 9. 25. 선고 77다1079 전원합의체판결"

29 "대법원 1976. 2. 24. 선고 75다1608 판결"

30 "대법원 1975. 9. 23. 선고 74다2091, 2092 판결"

31 "대법원 1974. 9. 24. 선고 74다1204, 1205 판결"

32 "대법원 1974. 6. 25. 선고 74다423 판결"

33 "대법원 1972. 11. 28. 선고 72다1789 판결"

34 "대법원 1969. 10. 23. 선고 69다1338 판결"

35 "대법원 1969. 10. 23. 선고 69다1338 판결"

36 "대법원 1960. 11. 13. 선고 4293민상222 판결"

37 "대법원 1959. 1. 29. 선고 4291민상148 판결"

38 "대법원 1954. 11. 18. 선고 4286민상63 판결"

39 柳昌昊, "관계적 소유권론의 검토" 6 : 279-, 1999

40 朴駿緖, "註釋民法 물권(1)"

41 朴駿緖, "註釋民法 總則(1)"

42 金疇洙, "親族相續法" 法文社 523-, 1989

43 宗田親彦, "破産法槪說, 新訂第3版" 慶應義塾大學出版會 2006

44 宗田親彦, "破産法槪說(新訂第3版)" 慶應義塾出版会 306-, 2006

45 中田淳一, "破産法和議法" 有斐閣 79-, 1959

46 伊藤眞, "破産法․民事再生法" 有斐閣 2007

47 加藤哲夫, "破産法, 第4版補正版" 弘文堂 116-, 2006

48 加藤哲夫, "破産法, 新版" 弘文堂 1998

49 能見善久, "現代信託法" 有斐閣 46-, 2004

50 能見善久, "現代信託法" 有斐閣 2004

51 齋藤秀夫, "注解破産法(上)" 靑林書院 81-, 1998

52 齋藤秀夫, "注解破産法(上)" 靑林書院 1999

53 郭潤直, "民法總則(제7판)" 博英社 128-, 2006

54 郭潤直, "民法注解 제5권"

55 郭潤直, "民法注解 제16권"

56 兼子 一, "民事法硏究 第1卷" 酒井書店 421-, 1950

57 小林秀之, "新破産から民法がみえる" 日本評論社 102-, 2006

58 竹下守夫, "大コンメンタール破産法"

59 竹下守夫, "大コンメンタール破産法" 靑林書院 2007

60 霜島甲一, "倒産法体系" 勁草書房 52-, 1990

61 山田 昭, "信託法立法過程の硏究" 勁草書房 1981

62 新井 誠, "信託法, 第3版" 有斐閣 2008

63 新井 誠, "信託法, 第2版" 有斐閣 2005

64 四宮和夫, "信託法(新版)" 有斐閣 1989

65 崔東軾, "信託法" 法文社 2006

66 李重基, "信託法" 三宇社 2007

67 통계청 고령자통계자료, "http://www.nso.go.kr"

68 Ferdinand Regelsberger, "Zwei Beiträge zur Lehre von der Cession, AcP 63, 172"

69 "Uniform Trust Code § 507; 11 U.S.C.A. § 541(d)"

70 Lupoi, Maurizio, "Trusts: A Comparative Study" Cambridge University Press 2000

71 Donovan W.M. Waters, "Trusts in the Setting of Business, Commerce, and Bankruptcy" 21 (21): 402-, 1984

72 Pierre Lepaulle, "Trusts and the Civil Law" 15 (15): 1933

73 Graham Moffat, "Trusts Law 563, 763 (4th ed)" Cambridge U. Press 2005

74 Kötz, Hein, "Trust und Treuhand: eine rechtsvergleichende Darstellung des anglo-amerikanischen Trust und funktionsverwandter Institute des deutschen Rechts" Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 1963

75 Grundmann, "Trust and Treuhand at the End of 20th Century. Key Problems and Shift of Interests" 47 (47): 1999

76 William F. Fratcher, "Trust" 6 : 3-5, 1970

77 Henssler, Martin, "Treuhandgeschäft - Dogmatik und Wirklichkeit" 196 (196): 1996

78 Löhnig, Martin, "Treuhand : Interessenwahrnehmung und Interessenkonflikte" Mohr Siebeck 2006

79 Martin Löhnig, "Treuhand : Interessenwahrnehmung und Interessen Ikonflikte"

80 John H. Langbein, "The Secret Life of the Trust: The Trust as an Instrument of Commerce" 107 (107): 179-180, 1997

81 Scott, Austin, "The Law of Trusts, Vols. 1 - 4" Aspen Publishers 2006

82 Pearce, Robert, "The Law of Trusts and Equitable Obligations, 4th ed" Oxford U. Press 2006

83 Hansmann, "The Functions of Trust Law: A Comparative Legal and Economic Analysis" 73 (73): 1998

84 W.S. Holdsworth, "The Early English Equity" 13 (13): 1915

85 Friedrich Carl von Savigny, "System des heutigen römischen Rechts, Band I, 2. Buch, S. 334, 338"

86 A.W. Scott, "Scott and Ascher on Trusts vol. 1, § 1.5"

87 Fitzgerald, P.J., "Salmond on Jurisprudence, 12th ed" Sweet & Maxwell 1966

88 Martin Wolff, "Sachenrecht, § 88 V"

89 Heinrich Dernburg, "Pandekten, § 100 (2. Aufl., 1888)"

90 Guest, A.G, "Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence" Clarendon Press 1961

91 Tony Honoré, "Ownership in Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence" Clarendon Press 112-124, 1961

92 Hanbury, "Modern Equity, 17th ed" Sweet & Maxwell 2005

93 Cantin Cumyn, Madeleine, "La propriété fiduciaire: mythe ou réalité?" 15 (15): 1984

94 Hohfeld, Wesley Newcomb, "Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning" Yale U. Press 1923

95 Pettit, Philip H, "Equity and the Law of Trusts, 10th ed" Oxford University Press 2006

96 Maitland, F.W, "Equity and the Forms of Action" Cambridge University Press 1929

97 Alfred Schultze, "Die langobardische Treuhand und ihre Umbildung zur Test amentvollstreckung, S. 86"

98 Becker, Rainer, "Die fiducie von Québec und der trust" Mohr Siebeck 2007

99 Canaris, Claus-Wilhelm, "Die Verdinglichung obligatorisher Rechte, Festschrift für Werner Flume zum 70. Geburtstag, Bd I , S. 411"

100 Coing, Helmut, "Die Treuhand Kraft privaten Rechtsgeschäfts" C.H. Beck 1973

101 Johann N. Podkomorski, "Die Rechtsnatur des Inkassotreuhandgeschäfts, 52f"

102 Ewald Katzmann, "Die Aussonderung von Treugut im Konkurs S. 41"

103 Stefan Grundmann, "Der Treuhandvertrag, insbesondere die werbende Treuhand"

104 Siebert, Wolfgang, "Das Rechtsgeschäftliche Treuhandverhältnis" Marburg 1933

105 Tolmie, Fiona, "Corporate and Personal Insovency Law, 2nd ed" Cavendish 2003

106 Hayton, "Commentary and Cases on The Law of Trusts and Equitable Remedies 12th ed" Sweet & Maxwell 2005

107 William Blackstone, "Commentaries on the Laws of England, vol. 2, 2"

108 Blackstone, William, "Commentaries on the Laws of England, vol. 2, 1st ed"

109 Carol M. Rose, "Canons of Property Talk, or, Blackstone's Anxiety" 108 (108): 1998

110 A.W.B. Simpson, "A History of the Common Law of Contract, The Rise of the Action of Assumpsit 199" Clarendon Press 1975