- 영문명
- Critic Investigation on the Criminal Responsibility for Premise Title Trust
- 발행기관
- 한국부동산학회
- 저자명
- 정신교(Jeong Shin Kyo)
- 간행물 정보
- 『부동산학보』不動産學報 第27輯, 129~141쪽, 전체 13쪽
- 주제분류
- 경제경영 > 경제학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2006.08.01
국문 초록
영문 초록
1. CONTENTS
(1) RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
The system of premise title trust has been denounced as it was frequently misused to conceal premise speculation or to commit diverse illegal misconduct. However, as premise real name system was enforced in 1995, such act became subject to punishment and the alteration of real right for premise by premise title trust and the registry thereof was invalidated. Thus, it is essential to establish legal relation different from that of the past in connection with premise title trust. Thus, this dissertation intends to concretely investigate positive type of title trust defined in the premise real name law and criminal responsibility of title trustee that voluntarily disposes premise with title trust in each case.
(2) RESEARCH METHOD
Referring to recent judgment and diverse dissertations related to premise trust system. I examined the concrete type and case of premise title trust.
(3) RESEARCH RESULTS
In premise title trust, the trustee that voluntarily disposes commits embezzlement irrespective of 2nd or 3rd party. If seller is mala fide contract title trust, malpractice is established. If seller is bona fide contract title trust, however, both embezzlement and malpractice are not established.
2. RESULTS
In the case of registry title trust such as 2-party registry title trust and 3-party registry title trust, the voluntary disposition of trustee also establishes embezzlement as before, because title trust itself, though invalidated by premise real name, still exists as actual material corroborating that the real ownership of premise belongs to title truster. In case that seller is bona fide in the 3-party contract title trust, the voluntary disposition of trustee does not establish embezzlement, because the ownership of trustee is recognized as per the intent of premise real name law. In case that seller is mala fide in the 3-party contract title trust, ownership is reverted to premise real name law, but embezzlement of title truster as the party that manages the business of truster is established, because the actual trust relation between title trustee and title truster is recognized.
(1) RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
The system of premise title trust has been denounced as it was frequently misused to conceal premise speculation or to commit diverse illegal misconduct. However, as premise real name system was enforced in 1995, such act became subject to punishment and the alteration of real right for premise by premise title trust and the registry thereof was invalidated. Thus, it is essential to establish legal relation different from that of the past in connection with premise title trust. Thus, this dissertation intends to concretely investigate positive type of title trust defined in the premise real name law and criminal responsibility of title trustee that voluntarily disposes premise with title trust in each case.
(2) RESEARCH METHOD
Referring to recent judgment and diverse dissertations related to premise trust system. I examined the concrete type and case of premise title trust.
(3) RESEARCH RESULTS
In premise title trust, the trustee that voluntarily disposes commits embezzlement irrespective of 2nd or 3rd party. If seller is mala fide contract title trust, malpractice is established. If seller is bona fide contract title trust, however, both embezzlement and malpractice are not established.
2. RESULTS
In the case of registry title trust such as 2-party registry title trust and 3-party registry title trust, the voluntary disposition of trustee also establishes embezzlement as before, because title trust itself, though invalidated by premise real name, still exists as actual material corroborating that the real ownership of premise belongs to title truster. In case that seller is bona fide in the 3-party contract title trust, the voluntary disposition of trustee does not establish embezzlement, because the ownership of trustee is recognized as per the intent of premise real name law. In case that seller is mala fide in the 3-party contract title trust, ownership is reverted to premise real name law, but embezzlement of title truster as the party that manages the business of truster is established, because the actual trust relation between title trustee and title truster is recognized.
목차
ABSTRACT
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 부동산실명법과 부동산명의 신탁의 법적 성격
Ⅲ. 부동산실명법상 명의신탁 유형에 따른 형사책임
Ⅳ. 기타의 문제
Ⅴ. 결론
參考文獻
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 부동산실명법과 부동산명의 신탁의 법적 성격
Ⅲ. 부동산실명법상 명의신탁 유형에 따른 형사책임
Ⅳ. 기타의 문제
Ⅴ. 결론
參考文獻
해당간행물 수록 논문
참고문헌
최근 이용한 논문
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!