不動産 名義信託에 관한 硏究

부동산 명의신탁의 법적 성격과 제도·판례를 연구했다.

Title trusting is within the interrelation between truster and trustee, a system in which the truster retains actual ownership, Performs management and makes profit from the concerned properties. Accordingly the trustee holds only nominal ownership in of officially registered documents in this occasion. The system of title trusting is unique in Korea that has been confirmed and developed with the support of judicial precedents. However, the main purpose of law is not limited to the control of actuality. It should pursue social justice and advancement of human environment.

Therefore, Problems of the title trusting system itself cannot be overlooked If actual effectiveness of the system is predominant. When the trustee disposes of the property entrusted to him by the truster without prior permission, awkward situations can be occurred between the truster and the buyers because it is difficult for the truster to maintain his Judicial right on the property and assert invalidity of the dealing. Thus, title trusting which skips the intermediate process is supposed to run the risks of reducing the effectiveness and righteousness of property registration system. Actually?

the system of title trusting is apt to be used for evil purposes to avoid applications of control laws toward building site limit and extra land Profits fax. Government authorities have been trying to create preventive devices, but it is not easy to detect every individual cases of such mischiefs connected with the title trusting system. Theories on title trusting vary and highly conflicting from each other. Some hold by judicial precedents which are in favor of the effectiveness of the system. Others show support to the opponents who deny it.

There also exists a third group who are willing to approve the new theory of clear ownership statement, In a word, general theoretical discussions on title trusting have been mainly focused on the effectiveness of the system. Under such circumstances this investigation tried to derive some suggestions to enhance the practice of title trusting as follows. First of all, public notification of the existing property registration system should be improved, adopting guarantee practices as title abstract, title analysis, title insurance, and escrow.

Secondly, a total enforcement and actual operation of the real-name property registration, which includes truster, trustee, initial and intermediate buyers, etc., should be conducted to prevent and incapacitate the attempts of using title trusting mischievously. True concept of public land owning can be realized only through the establishment of nation-wide consensus that real estate should not be regarded as means of increasing private wealth but possess it as the fundamental basement of human welfare and national production.