신탁제도와 유류분반환청구권과의 관계
Relationship between the Trust and the Legal Reserve of Inheritance
0
조회
0
다운로드
19
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In the case of trusts as will substitutes, the base property in calculation of legal reserve of inheritance is rights to benefit, and the substance of trusts as will substitutes is testamentary gifts or gift effective upon death of rights to benefit. Rights to benefit are inherited property, the other party to demand the return is the beneficiary, and the object to demand the return is rights to benefit. In the case of the will trust, the base property in calculation of legal reserve of inheritance is trust property, and trust property is inherited property. The other party to demand the return is the trustee, and the object to demand the return is trust property. In the case of trusts with successive beneficiaries, depending on the type of trust, the argument of the will trust or trusts as will substitutes is applied as it is. The value of rights to benefit of the second beneficiary is included in the base property in calculation of legal reserve of inheritance, and the other party to demand the return also includes the second beneficiary.
Abstract
In the case of trusts as will substitutes, the base property in calculation of legal reserve of inheritance is rights to benefit, and the substance of trusts as will substitutes is testamentary gifts or gift effective upon death of rights to benefit. Rights to benefit are inherited property, the other party to demand the return is the beneficiary, and the object to demand the return is rights to benefit. In the case of the will trust, the base property in calculation of legal reserve of inheritance is trust property, and trust property is inherited property. The other party to demand the return is the trustee, and the object to demand the return is trust property. In the case of trusts with successive beneficiaries, depending on the type of trust, the argument of the will trust or trusts as will substitutes is applied as it is. The value of rights to benefit of the second beneficiary is included in the base property in calculation of legal reserve of inheritance, and the other party to demand the return also includes the second beneficiary.
참고문헌 (19)
- 광장신탁법연구회, "주석 신탁법" (2015), 박영사
- 법무부, "신탁법 개정안 해설", ~ (2010)
- 권재문, "연이은 유증과 수익자연속 신탁의 관계: 유류분 반환의 법률관계를 중심으로", 입법과 정책, 7(2), pp.337~361 (2015), 국회입법조사처[DOI]
- 김상훈, "새로운 재산승계수단으로서의 보험금청구권신탁", 사법, 1(41), pp.3~44 (2017), 사법발전재단[DOI]
- 김상훈, "유언대용신탁을 활용한 가업승계", 기업법연구, 29(4), pp.9~34 (2015), 한국기업법학회
- 김순석, "신탁을 활용한 중소기업의 경영권 승계 방안에 관한 연구 ― 유언대용신탁 및 수익자연속신탁의 활용을 중심으로 ―", 법학논총, 36(4), pp.371~406 (2016), 법학연구소
- 김종원, "민사신탁을 이용한 증여∙상속(사업승계) 구조화 방법에 관한 연구", 민사법학, 67, pp.427~468 (2014), 한국민사법학회
- 김판기, "고령화 사회에 있어서 재산관리와 승계수단으로서의 신탁 - 유언신탁과 유언대용신탁을 부가하여 -", 동아법학, (55), pp.201~225 (2012), 법학연구소[DOI]
- 이계정, "신탁의 기본 법리에 관한 연구―본질과 독립재산성", 박사, pp.2016
- 이근영, "신탁법상 재산승계제도와 상속", 법학논총, 32(3), pp.207~236 (2012), 법학연구소
- 이근영, "수익자연속신탁에 관한 고찰", 재산법연구, 27(3), pp.129~155 (2011), 한국재산법학회
- 이화연, "재산승계수단으로서의 신탁과 상속―신탁의 재산승계수단으로서의 활용가능성과 유류분 반환의 문제를 중심으로", 사법논집, 65 (2017), 법원행정처
- 임채웅, "신탁과 유류분에 관한 연구", 사법, 1(41), pp.129~150 (2017), 사법발전재단[DOI]
- 임채웅, "遺言信託 및 遺言代用信託의 硏究", 인권과 정의, (397), pp.124~143 (2009), 대한변호사협회[DOI]
- 정구태, "신탁제도를 통한 재산승계 -유류분과의 관계를 중심으로-", 인문사회 21, 9(1), pp.657~666 (2018), 인문사회 21[DOI]
- 정소민, "신탁을 통한 재산승계와 유류분반환청구권", 한양법학, 28(2), pp.217~244 (2017), 한양법학회
- 조성필, "판례를 중심으로 한 유류분 실무", 인권과 정의, (466) (2017), 대한변호사협회
- 최수정, "개정신탁법상의 재산승계제도 -유언대용신탁과 수익자연속신탁을 중심으로-", 법학논총, 31(2), pp.65~87 (2011), 법학연구소
- 최준규, "민사판례연구 38" (2016), 박영사