부동산 명의수탁자 상속인의 횡령죄 성립 여부

• 영문명: Thedisposalofrealestateofthenominal trustee’sheirandembezzlement
• 발행기관: 한국형사판례연구회
• 저자명: 천진호(Chun, Jin-Ho)
• 간행물 정보: 『형사판례연구』형사판례연구 제23권, 337~372쪽, 전체 36쪽
• 주제분류: 법학 > 법학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2015.06.30

영문 초록

A legal purposes of ‘Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name’ and ‘Act on the real name financial transaction’-currently being implemented revised on November 29-reason for the amendment, and when you see ‘Real Estate Real Name Registration Act’ Article 3 paragraph 1, From the premise that change is invalid lend the name of the property to another person and its rights under the contract, a review is needed for the attitude of the Supreme Court judgment that character to keep the heir’s about the person registered as the owner of the property. In other words, between actual owners and heirs of the estate are kept relationship based on trust each other is not permitted. Therefore, even if the heir to the disposal of real estate or deny the return embezzlement is not true. And as others have to borrow the name agreement and its premise the No. 2 Article 8 of this law will see a change in the rights of a valid, If the spouse who is the spouse parties who trustee is a fiduciary relationship ended by killing, whether civil, even people who trustee and fiduciary arrangements remain in full force and effect between the heir to Article 187 of one trustee of a trust estate by acquiring the rights, the fiduciary relationship and analysis for the presence, And if you refuse to return the heirs of those who trustee on the basis of this judicial discretion, trustees who are required to take and interpret whether civil remedies in any way for the preservation of the property of the trust estate. Moreover, this interpretation is that the same legal principles to be applied even if the disappearance or death or divorce of a marriage partner relationships cancellation of either spouse. The Supreme Court has interpreted to establish a trust relationship for the heirs of the people who destroyed fiduciary trustees who have a partner relationship. However, as the interpretation of the Court of Appeals after a valid contract between the couple if the spouse who trust relationship has ended, In particular, because the people who trustee if the trustee is not recognized, the murder of people who trust relationship between the heirs and trustees who trustee, Even if the heirs of the people trustee disposes of the trust estate, or even arbitrarily refuse to return embezzlement is reasonable to interpret that which is not true.

목차

[대상판결 1-1] 대법원 1996.1.23. 선고 95도784 판결 [특정경제범죄가 중처벌등에 관한 법률 위반(횡령)(인정된 죄명: 횡령)]

[대상판결 1-2] 대법원 2007.6.28. 선고 2006다48632 판결 (부당이득금 반환)

[대상판결 2] 대법원 2013.1.24. 선고 2011다99498 판결 (소유권 이전등기)

Ⅰ. 대상판결의 쟁점과 문제제기

Ⅱ. 부동산실명법의 입법취지 및 올바른 적용 방향, 개정 금융실명법의 취지와 내용

Ⅲ. 대상판결 검토: 명의수탁자 상속인의 횡령죄 성립 여부

Ⅳ. 결론

키워드

명의신탁 상속인의 포괄승계 횡령죄 위탁관계 수탁부동산 처분 disposal of real estate nominal trustee heir embezzlement entrustment relatio