도시정비사업에서 신탁의 실질 = The Substance of Trust in Urban Improvement Project

국문 초록 (Abstract)

도시정비법상 신탁방식 정비사업은 신탁의 구조와 정비사업의 구조가 혼재하고 있는데, 신탁법을 적용하기 위해서는 신탁으로서의 실질을 갖추어야 한다는 점에서 토지등소유자와 사업시행자인 신탁업자의 신탁계약의 의미와 신탁업자의 권한 및 토지등소유자의 수익권을 면밀히 살펴볼 필요가 있다. 신탁방식 정비사업에서 신탁계약은 신탁업자를 사업시행자로 지정 동의하는 시점에 성립하고, 신탁업자의 권한제한은 신탁계약에 기한 것이 아닌 토지등소유자의 권리를 보호하기 위한 정비사업의 구조에서 비롯된 것이다. 정비사업으로부터 발생한 이익의 귀속은 도시정비법상 관리처분계획과 이전고시 등에 의한 것으로 수익채권에 기한 것이 아니다. 정비사업에서 신탁계약은 도시정비법과 시행규정을 보완하는 측면에서 기능하고 있을 뿐이다. 한편, 조합방식 재건축사업에서 관행적으로 이루어지는 조합명의 신탁등기는 수익자와 수익권의 내용을 상정할 수 없어 무효인 등기이며, 명의신탁으로도 볼 수 없다. 정비사업과 무관한 개별 신탁의 경우, 위탁자가 수익자의 지위를 겸하지 않는다면 신탁법 법리에 따라 수탁자를 토지등소유자로 보는 것이 타당하다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Trust-based urban improvement projects under the Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments present a complex interplay between the legal structure of trusts and the regulatory framework governing improvement project. Since the application of the Trust Act presupposes that the legal relationship in question substantively qualifies as a trust, it is necessary to carefully examine the legal significance of the trust contract concluded between landowners and trust companies acting as project implementers, the scope of authority vested in the trust company, and the nature of the beneficial rights held by landowners. In trust-based improvement project, the trust contract between the truster and the trustee is established at the point when consent is given to designate the trustee as the project implementer. The limitations imposed on the trust company’s authority, however, do not derive from the terms of the trust contract itself, but rather from the public law structure of improvement project designed to protect the rights of landowners. Furthermore, the allocation of profits generated through improvement project is determined by the management and disposal plan and the public notice of transfer under the IUARE Act, and cannot be construed as arising from beneficial rights under the Trust Act. Accordingly, the trust contract in improvement project functions merely as a supplementary instrument to the IUARE Act and its formulation of implementation rules, rather than as a trust in its substantive sense. With respect to association-based development project, trust registrations made in the name of the association—a customary practice in the industry—must be deemed void, as it is impossible to identify specific beneficiaries or to define the content of beneficial rights, and such registrations cannot be characterized as Title Trust either. In the case of individual trusts unrelated to improvement project, it is legally sound to treat the trustee as the landowner in accordance with the principles of the Trust Act, provided that the truster does not simultaneously hold the status of beneficiary.