부동산신탁이란 일정한 목적을 위하여 위탁자의 부동산에 대한 재산권을 이전시켜 수익자를 위하여 부동산을 관리ㆍ처분토록 하는 법률관계로서, 부동산개발에 전문성을 가진 신탁회사들이 부동산을 둘러싼 여러 경제주체들의 이익을 안정적이고 효율적으로 보장할 수 있도록 하는 훌륭한 기능을 가진 제도이다. 부동산투기에 대한 사회적 관심이 집중되던 1990년경부터 본격적으로 시행되어 온 부동산신탁제도는, 2000년경부터 호황을 이루기 시작한 각종 건설사업과 관련하여 금융기관들이 건설회사에 프로젝트 파이낸싱(Project Financing, 이른바 PF대출)을 해 주는 과정에서 담보 목적으로 활용되기 시작하면서 그 효용이 새로이 주목받게 되었다. 즉, 부동산신탁이 채권담보의 목적으로 이용되게 된 것이다. 이렇게 채권담보의 목적으로 부동산신탁이 이용되는 현상이 점점 더 확대되어가자, 그 법리 내지는 법적 성격을 어떻게 파악해야 하는지에 관한 논의도 자연스럽게 활발해지기 시작했다. 이 글은 우선 채권담보의 목적으로 이용되는 이러한 ‘부동산담보신탁’의 법적 성질을 어떻게 파악할 것인지에 관한 논의를 살펴본 후, 나아가 이러한 부동산담보신탁을 이용하고 있는 건설회사에 대하여 회생절차가 개시되었을 때 위탁자인 채무자 건설회사, 신탁된 목적부동산, 수익자인 채권자가 회생절차 단계별로 어떠한 취급을 받게 될 지에 관하여 구체적으로 검토하는 것을 목표로 하였다. 부동산담보신탁의 법적 성질에 관하여는 주로 민법학자들을 중심으로 이를 담보권의 일종으로, 즉 비전형담보로 파악하려는 주장이 제기되어 왔는데, 담보권의 일종으로 파악하다 보니 부종성, 우선변제권을 인정하게 되고 나아가 신탁계약대로 목적부동산이 처분되지 않게 될 때 수익자가 법원에 경매를 신청할 수 있도록 하자는 제안까지 하게 되었다. 그러나, 부동산담보신탁이 담보적인 기능을 하는 것은 그것이 담보권의 일종이기 때문이 아니라 신탁제도 자체가 안정적인 담보의 기능을 하기 때문이며, 따라서 신탁제도 자체의 고유한 법리에 기초한 해석으로써 부동산담보신탁제도를 충분히 설명할 수 있다는 것이 필자의 견해이다. 채무자인 건설회사에 대하여 회생절차가 개시되면, ⅰ) 위 신탁재산은 수탁자 명의의 재산으로서 도산격리효과를 누리게 되고, ⅱ) 그 결과 부동산담보신탁의 수익자인 채권자는, 채무자 회생 및 파산에 관한 법률 제250조 제2항 제2호 소정의, 채무자 이외의 제3자가 제공한 담보(즉, 물상담보)를 가지고 있는 회생채권자로 취급되며, ⅲ) 비록 수탁자 명의로 이전되어 있지만 회생절차라는 고유한 관점에서 볼 때 담보신탁의 목적부동산은 위탁자인 채무자의 자산으로 분류된 후 청산가치 및 계속기업가치에 반영되는데, 청산가치를 계산함에 있어서는 ‘목적부동산의 가치’를 기준으로, 계속기업가치를 계산함에 있어서는 목적부동산에 관하여 신탁계약상 예정되어 있는 사업을 시행한 후 얻을 수 있는 ‘사업이익의 가치’를 기준으로 반영될 것이고, ⅳ) 회생계획안을 작성함에 있어서는, 수익자인 채권자는 목적부동산 또는 사업이익을 환가한 후 받을 수 있는 수익금으로 우선 변제하도록 하는 내용의 회생계획안을 작성하게 될 것이다.

We usually deliver the real property to the Real Estate Trust Company entrusting it with fiduciary duty to manage the property for the benefit of the beneficiary. In general, a Trust of Real Property(“TRP” hereunder) serves parties related to the Trust in various and effective ways. Since established in 1990s when speculative investments on real estate were prevalent arousing national concern, TRP has recently become a matter of primary interest while being used for the purpose of security by financial institutions which has given Project Financing or Bridge Loan to a number of construction companies. Responding to this new trend toward using TRP for the purpose of security(Collateral TRP, “CTRP” hereunder), a discussion on the doctrine and rule about CTRP has been going on. This thesis considers every aspect of CTRP done in relation to the construction company under rehabilitation procedure after attempting an elaborate theoretical analysis on how to comprehend its basic rule. With respect to the theoretical analysis on CTRP, an argument which explains that CTRP is another kind of security right has been put forward, mostly by scholars on Civil Act. It suggests that most major characteristics given to the mortgage right under property law, i.e. attendant nature, satisfaction in preference to other creditors, and even, the right to claim for auction, should be vested in CTRP also. However, CTRP is functioning like a security or mortgage right from the beneficiary's point of view because it has a shielding effect derived from the transferred legal title to trustee, not because it could, in essence, be classified as a security right or whatever. Thus, I believe CTRP and its rationale could be construed and explained wholly within the interpretive structure of Trust Act. With respect to the CTRP and its relevant parties under rehabilitation procedure, ① the real property would be exempted from assets belonging to the debtor under its rehabilitation procedure for the sake of liability ; bankruptcy remoteness, ② the beneficiary would be classified as one of rehabilitation creditors who retains the security furnished by any person other than the debtor[Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Law §250 (2) 2] , ③ on the other hand, aside from the nominal transfer of legal title, the real property should be included in debtor's assets when appraising the debtor's value both in liquidation and in continuing business, applying the property's exchangeable value with respect to value in liquidation and the property's operational value with respect to value in continuing business, ④ finally, in drawing up the rehabilitation plan, the beneficiary in CTRP would be deserved to get satisfaction first through selling or operating the real property under trust agreement, in addition to the basic change and repayment of his or her right such as in general rehabilitation creditors.

We usually deliver the real property to the Real Estate Trust Company entrusting it with fiduciary duty to manage the property for the benefit of the beneficiary. In general, a Trust of Real Property(“TRP” hereunder) serves parties related to the Trust in various and effective ways. Since established in 1990s when speculative investments on real estate were prevalent arousing national concern, TRP has recently become a matter of primary interest while being used for the purpose of security by financial institutions which has given Project Financing or Bridge Loan to a number of construction companies. Responding to this new trend toward using TRP for the purpose of security(Collateral TRP, “CTRP” hereunder), a discussion on the doctrine and rule about CTRP has been going on. This thesis considers every aspect of CTRP done in relation to the construction company under rehabilitation procedure after attempting an elaborate theoretical analysis on how to comprehend its basic rule. With respect to the theoretical analysis on CTRP, an argument which explains that CTRP is another kind of security right has been put forward, mostly by scholars on Civil Act. It suggests that most major characteristics given to the mortgage right under property law, i.e. attendant nature, satisfaction in preference to other creditors, and even, the right to claim for auction, should be vested in CTRP also. However, CTRP is functioning like a security or mortgage right from the beneficiary's point of view because it has a shielding effect derived from the transferred legal title to trustee, not because it could, in essence, be classified as a security right or whatever. Thus, I believe CTRP and its rationale could be construed and explained wholly within the interpretive structure of Trust Act. With respect to the CTRP and its relevant parties under rehabilitation procedure, ① the real property would be exempted from assets belonging to the debtor under its rehabilitation procedure for the sake of liability ; bankruptcy remoteness, ② the beneficiary would be classified as one of rehabilitation creditors who retains the security furnished by any person other than the debtor[Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Law §250 (2) 2] , ③ on the other hand, aside from the nominal transfer of legal title, the real property should be included in debtor's assets when appraising the debtor's value both in liquidation and in continuing business, applying the property's exchangeable value with respect to value in liquidation and the property's operational value with respect to value in continuing business, ④ finally, in drawing up the rehabilitation plan, the beneficiary in CTRP would be deserved to get satisfaction first through selling or operating the real property under trust agreement, in addition to the basic change and repayment of his or her right such as in general rehabilitation creditors.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

trust of real property, collateral trust of real property, Trust Act, the right to benefit, Project Financing, Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Law, rehabilitation procedure, bankruptcy remoteness, value in liquidation, value in continuing business, benefit of the trust, rehabilitation plan