beta
red_flag_2(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2009. 5. 19. 선고 2009나2728 판결

[재단채권확인의소][미간행]

Plaintiff, Appellant

Plaintiff, Ltd.

Defendant, appellant and appellant

The bankruptcy trustee of ○ Trust Co., Ltd.

Conclusion of Pleadings

April 24, 2009

The first instance judgment

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2008Gadan208245 Decided December 16, 2008

Text

1. The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of claim

In this Court's 2004Gada48466, Seoul High Court 2005Na73978, Supreme Court's 2007Da89454, this Court's 36,150,000 claims for reimbursement against the bankrupt trust are estate claims against the bankrupt ○○ trust.

2. Purport of appeal

The same shall apply to the order.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

The reasoning for this part of the court's explanation is the same as that for the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The assertion

The plaintiff asserts that the above litigation costs (hereinafter referred to as "the lawsuit costs of this case") are estate claims since ○○ Trust Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "○○ Trust") is a claim arising from the defendant's act against the bankrupt foundation after the bankrupt was declared bankrupt and the defendant was declared bankrupt. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the trust contract (hereinafter referred to as "the trust contract of this case") entered into with the plaintiff as a manager of the trust property as a claim for reimbursement of expenses under the trust contract of this case (hereinafter "the trust contract of this case") and that it is not a lawsuit for reimbursement of expenses of this case against the bankrupt foundation in the position of manager of the bankruptcy foundation, and that it is a

(b) Related statutes;

Bankruptcy Act (amended by Act No. 7428, Mar. 31, 2005; hereinafter “Bankruptcy Act”)

Article 14 (Definition of Bankruptcy Claims)

Any claim on property against the bankrupt arising before the bankruptcy is declared, shall be a bankruptcy claim.

Article 38 (Scope of Estate Claims)

The following claims shall be regarded as estate claims:

4. Claims accruing from any act performed by the bankruptcy trustee with respect to the bankrupt estate;

Trust Act

Article 11 (Termination of Duties of Trustee)

(1) Where a trustee dies or becomes bankrupt, or is declared incompetent or quasi-incompetent, his/her duties shall be terminated. The same shall also apply where a corporate trustee is dissolved.

(2) In cases under the preceding paragraph, the heir, legal representative, trustee in bankruptcy, or liquidator of a trustee shall take custody of the trust property and perform acts necessary for the transfer of trust affairs until a new trustee becomes able to perform the trust affairs. The same shall also apply to a corporation established by the merger or a corporation surviving the merger.

Article 22 (Bankruptcy and Trust Property of Trustee)

The trust property shall not constitute the bankruptcy estate of the trustee, unless it becomes the proprietary property of the trustee.

Article 30 (Liability of Trustee for Separate Management)

The trust property shall be managed separately from the trustee's proprietary property or other trust property: Provided, That where the trust property is money, it shall be sufficient to clarify its accounts separately from the money belonging to the proprietary property or other trust property.

Article 31 (Restriction on Acquisition of Right by Trustee)

(1) No trustee shall make a trust property as its proprietary property or acquire any right thereto, regardless of in whose name the trustee is entitled: Provided, That where it is apparent that a trust property is beneficial to the beneficiary or there is any justifiable reason, he/she may make it its proprietary

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraph, the trustee may succeed to the right to the trust property by inheritance or any other universal title. The provisions of Article 23 shall apply mutatis mutandis to such cases.

Article 42 (Expenses, Claims for Compensation by Trustee)

(1) Where a trustee receives compensation for any taxes, public charges and other expenses and interest borne with respect to trust property, or any loss incurred in performing trust affairs without any negligence, he/she may sell the trust property and exercise the right in preference to other persons having the right.

(2) A trustee may request a beneficiary to compensate for expenses or losses under the preceding paragraph, or have him/her provide a reasonable security: Provided, That this shall not apply when the beneficiary is not specified or does not exist.

(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply where a beneficiary renounces his/her rights.

C. Determination

On the other hand, the above lawsuit against the plaintiff was filed after the defendant was declared bankrupt, and the trust contract with the plaintiff is terminated. On the other hand, the trust property is strictly separated and managed in principle from the trust property under Article 22 of the Trust Act (see Articles 30 through 32 of the Trust Act), which provides that the trust property shall not constitute the trustee's bankruptcy estate except that it is the trustee's proprietary property. Article 11 of the Trust Act provides that the trustee who is declared bankrupt may keep the trust property and conduct an act necessary for the transfer of the trust affairs until the new trustee becomes able to perform the trust affairs. The above lawsuit against the plaintiff is not a manager of the bankruptcy estate composed of proprietary property, but a trustee of the trust property based on the above Article of the Bankruptcy Act, which is not a trustee of the bankruptcy estate. The estate claim prescribed under the Bankruptcy Act is, in principle, a claim for expenses paid for the joint interest of the bankruptcy creditor or a new legal act by the trustee of the bankruptcy for the joint interest of the bankruptcy creditor, etc., and even if it is interpreted after the bankruptcy claim is determined after the bankruptcy claim.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance with different conclusions is unfair, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Young-soo (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Justice)