지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Generally a trust refers to the legal relationships created - inter vivos or on death - by a person, the settlor, when assets have been placed under the control of a trustee for the benefit of a beneficiary or for a specified purpose. The law of trusts is an offspring from a certain English legal creature known as equity. This means that the countries which have a civil law system like Korea,, japan and Germany should have a different kind of trust law. The Korean Trust code was established modelling the japanese Trust Code. And the latter is under amendment after long and active discussions. The japanese experiences of getting to the proposed amendment gives much profitable insight in better understanding ours. In this study four topics regarding a private trust in the proposed amendment are investigated and compared to the Korean regulations and their construction:
Actually Korean Trust Code has no explicit provisions about a power of appointment and successive interests. But the interpretation of the existing provisions allows the settlers to give the power of appointment to trustee or third party. In this case still the legal problems about the relationship between them and the legal effects remain unresolved. The proposed amendment has relevant provisions in this issue and sheds light in clarifying the uncertainties in our Code.
Under the Korean Code a trust can be created by will while it still lacks detailed provisions. So a testamentary trust needs detailed provisions and supporting theories for them to be used more often in practice and also to complement the civil law and the trust law. The proposed amendment on this issue seems to be still far from complete but this can be a starting line for further discussions and refinements.
A trust is settled normally by contract in Korea, so the settler gets the status of party in the contract. Thus whether the inheritance of the settler's rights and duties be accepted or not is still controversial. The proposed amendment brings on a change regarding the problem and it gives good lessons to us.
Actually Korean Trust Code has no explicit provisions about a power of appointment and successive interests. But the interpretation of the existing provisions allows the settlers to give the power of appointment to trustee or third party. In this case still the legal problems about the relationship between them and the legal effects remain unresolved. The proposed amendment has relevant provisions in this issue and sheds light in clarifying the uncertainties in our Code.
Under the Korean Code a trust can be created by will while it still lacks detailed provisions. So a testamentary trust needs detailed provisions and supporting theories for them to be used more often in practice and also to complement the civil law and the trust law. The proposed amendment on this issue seems to be still far from complete but this can be a starting line for further discussions and refinements.
A trust is settled normally by contract in Korea, so the settler gets the status of party in the contract. Thus whether the inheritance of the settler's rights and duties be accepted or not is still controversial. The proposed amendment brings on a change regarding the problem and it gives good lessons to us.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 수익자지정권 등
Ⅲ. 수익자연속신탁
Ⅳ. 유언신탁
Ⅴ. 위탁자지위의 상속
Ⅵ. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
재산승계제도로서 민사신탁제도 활용상의 문제점
한양법학
2013 .05
-
부양신탁에 관한 연구
한양법학
2014 .05
-
예금채권에 대한 신탁법의 적용과 문제점 : 민사신탁의 기반확대를 위한 관점에서
비교사법
2010 .06
-
신탁법의 개정방향 : 법무부 2009년 신탁법 전면개정안을 중심으로
법학연구
2010 .02
-
신탁법 개정에 따른 신탁세제 개편 방향에 관한 연구
조세연구
2010 .08
-
신탁법상의 상계 : 일본 신탁법 개정과정에서의 논의를 중심으로
중앙법학
2007 .12
-
신탁과 관련된 상속세ㆍ증여세문제와 Estate Planning 도구로서 신탁의 이용가능성
조세법연구
2011 .12
-
유언대용신탁 및 수익자연속신탁의 과세에 대한 연구
증권법연구
2013 .08
-
신탁법 개정에 따른 자본시장법상 투자신탁의 신탁관계에 관한 고찰
비교사법
2013 .08
-
擬制信託(Constructive Trusts)의 理解
비교사법
2011 .12
-
우리나라 신탁업의 현황과 전망
법과기업연구
2012 .12
-
사업신탁의 기업조직적 특징과 수익자책임법리
기업법연구
2008 .03
-
신탁(信託)의 기본구조(基本構造)와 그 법리(法理) : 일본(日本)에서의 논의(論議)를 중심(中心)으로
중앙법학
2007 .08
-
신탁법의 관점에서 본 공공신탁법리
비교사법
2014 .05
-
黙示信託과 擬制信託의 硏究 : 평석대상 판결 대법원 2002. 7. 26. 선고 2000다17070 판결
저스티스
2008 .08
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-360-018273314