부동산신탁의 사해성 판단 = Determining whether real estate trust gives rise to fraudulent transfer

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Real estate trust means a legal relationship that a settlor transfers his ownership of real property to a trustee or offers it as a security, et cetera. It is based upon fiduciary relationship between a settlor and a trustee and grants a trustee to do necessary conduct for a beneficiary`s benefit or his specific purpose. Real estate trust is usually categorized as real estate management, real estate disposition trust, real estate security in trust, and land trust. However, for establishing real estate trust, a settlor`s chargeable properties can be decreased and it may leads to deficiency of the joint security of general creditors to repay them in full. This kind of establishment is called ``fraudulent transfer to a trust``. For the purpose of protecting general creditors of a settler by preserving a settlor`s chargeable properties, it is authorized to revoke trust under the provision of Article 8 of Trust Act, which is called ``Creditor`s right of revocation of fraudulent transter to a trust``. Legal relationships to which ``creditor`s right of rescission``, similar to ``Creditor`s right of revocation of fraudulent transfer to a trust``, applies, can be divided into (1) Decrease of net assets or Increase of liabilities (``the 1st type``), (2) Preferential payment (``the 2nd type``), (3) Transformation of the structure of assets (``the 3rd type``). It is generally recognized that the 1st type injures the right of general creditors fraudulently, while the 2nd type differs to which a debtor`s actions correspond, payment in cash, payment in substitutes, or provision of security. As to the 3rd type, it also can be sorted into fraudulent action save and except the case that the purpose of the action is justifiable. One can also sort out fraudulent use of real estate trust following the classification mentioned above. Though real estate management and real estate disposition trust are classified as the 3rd type altogether, the latter will be more likely to be blamed for fraudulent injury to general creditor since real estate disposition pursues liquidation of real property, while real estate management simply allows a trustee to manage real property and leaves beneficiary right to a settlor. If a settlor establishes real estate security in trust to secure the payment of his existing debt, this case will be classified as the 2nd type and it is more likely to be blamed for fraudulent injury to general creditor since he prefers a certain creditor to the other in his repayment. However, If a settlor establishes real estate security in trust to secure the payment of his new (prospective) debt, this case will be classified as the 3rd type but it will not be judged as being fraudulent use of real estate trust exceptionally because it gives a creditor beneficiary right in return for his new (prospective) funding and therefore its purpose is justifiable. Judging Fraudulent Use of land trust, the same rule will be applied. Although criteria for judging ``creditor`s right of rescission`` has its value judging fraudulent use of real estate trust, both of them differs in telling good faith and bad faith of a trustee apart, so there is need of development of separate criteria for judging fraudulent use of real estate trust and I will note it for my further research.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 고경우, "채권자취소권의 객관적 요건으로서의 사해성과 사해행위의 유형별 고찰" 부산판례연구회 20 : 2009

2 이순동, "채권자취소권" 육법사 2012

3 광장신탁법연구회, "주석신탁법" 박영사 2016

4 주선아, "일부 채권자에게 기존채무의 이행과 관련하여 다른 채권을 양도하는 경우의 사해성 판단 -대법원 2011. 10. 13. 선고 2011다28045 판결-" 민사판례연구회 (35) : 207-262, 2013

5 이재욱, "신탁법해설" 사법행정학회 2000

6 이중기, "신탁법" 삼우사 2007

7 금융감독원, "신탁관련 통계('15년 3분기)"

8 진상훈, "부동산신탁의 유형별 사해행위 판단방법" 4 : 2008

9 한상곤, "부동산 담보신탁의 수익권에 관한 고찰" 법학연구소 49 (49): 3-38, 2014

10 곽윤직, "민법주해 채권(2)" 박영사 2004

11 지원림, "민법강의" 홍문사 2005

12 김미리, "대법원판례해설 85호(2010 하반기)" 법원도서관 2011

13 이우재, "대법원판례해설 46호" 법원도서관 2004