Earticle

The revised Korean Trust Act shall be in force from 25. July 2012. It is aimed to keep pace with the practical needs and demands of participants in trust transaction. The existing trust act has been often criticized as being outdated and inadequate for resolving many legal and practical issues currently faced in the areas of trust law. The revised act shows that the avoidance of fraudulent trusts should be dealt with differently from the traditional avoidance of fraudulent conveyance both in respect of the avoidance of the acquisition of the trust property by the trustee and the acquisition of benefits by the beneficiaries. This article analyses the pertinent interests of the participants, who are involved in trust transaction and opposes to the attitude of the revised act with the alternative, that the avoidance of fraudulent trust should be resettled according to the various forms and characters of fraudulent transaction. It explains also in relation to bankruptcy avoidance how this should be in accordance with the avoidance of fraudulent trust in the revised trust act.

The amendment bill on the Debtors' Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Law(“Law”) has been proposed to the National Assembly in 2011, which includes among others drastic change of cram-down system as well as introduction of automatic stay. The current cram-down system is intended that the court exercises its discretion in approving the rehabilitation plan although the plan fails to meet the requirements of consenting votes by a certain rehabilitation creditors' group, by providing the clause for protection of the rights of such rehabilitation creditors. The current system reveals some practical problems such as evaluation of fair market value of the secured assets subject to secured rehabilitation creditors' group and actual distribution of proceeds of disposed assets to general rehabilitation creditors. The proposed amendment purports to drastic change of the current system by adopting mandatory approval of rehabilitation plan without allowing the court's discretion, and providing more protection to rehabilitation creditors. For the latter amendment, the bill proposes that the company shall pay debts to dissenting rehabilitation creditors not less than the amount of debts without regard to actual value of assets subject to such creditors. As to this amendment bill, there are sharp criticisms from finance industry as well as academic field. First of all, it is doubtful if the amendment bill has to adopt mandatory approval system instead of discretionary approval system in view of inherent nature of rehabilitation procedure as provided in the Law. The Law has authorized the court to exercise its discretion in approving the rehabilitation plan of a company by considering various factors affecting rehabilitation of such company. This change may negatively affect to use of rehabilitation procedure by industries in view of complicated nature of rehabilitation procedures and balancing interests of creditors, shareholders or other parties concerned. In addition, the requirement that the amount of payment to dissenting rehabilitation creditors be not less than the amount of debts may be also negatively affect to the rehabilitation procedure. This requirement may give more benefit to dissenting creditors than creditors consenting to the rehabilitation plan. As seen above, the proposed amendment is not compatible with the principle or purpose of rehabilitation system ann unrealistic by depriving the court of its discretion in approving the rehabilitation plan. The problems found in the current system should rather be solved by flexible management of the cram-down system instead of adopting the new amendment.

韓国の債務者回生および破産に関する法律（債務者回生法）は、2005 年3月31日に制定され、2006年4月1日から施行されている。政府は、 2011年10月25日國務會議の議決を経て、この法律の改正案を2012年9月 4日、國會に提出した。 この改正案は、深刻な社會問題化されている、連帶保證人の問題の解 決のため、法人 債務者が回生手續を進行するとき、債權者の保證債務者 に対する執行を、回生計劃案が認可される時まで、禁止するのでいる。 その理由は、保證債務者に債權者達との交涉時間の賦與して、回生可能 性を高めると、連帶保證人を保護するのでいる。 その改正案は、結果的に立法できなかったけど、向うに再追進する可 能性もあるから、如何に立法するのが妥當であるかに関する、檢討する 必要である。 その改正案は、連帶保證人に対する債權者の執行を、一時的に延期す るので過ぎないから、事實連帶保證人問題の根本的な解決策はできな い。韓国では、法律の改正より連帶保證を要求する、金融機關の舊時代 的な慣行を改善するのが時急である。 しかし、この金融機關の慣行が改善されるまでは、債務者回生法の保 證債務の附從性原則を排除する規程を、削除するのが必要である。 そして、債務者回生法で連帶保證人を保護する具體的な立法方案は、 ① 連帶保證債務たけで主債務の權利變更の效力を及ぶのは、保證債務を 合理的な理由なし差別するから、一般保證に対しても同じに適用するの が望ましい。② 主債務者の回生の場合たけ適用するのは、不合理な差別 になるから、回生及び破産に対しても同じに、適用するのが衡平性に当たる。 ③ 調査報告書および回生計劃案に、保證債務者も含めて、保證債務者の 辨濟能力に当たる、責任を負担するようにして、この制度を惡用する者 に対して、道德的の解弛を防ぐのが必要である。

After the implementation of the debtor rehabilitation act, commencement applications for corporate rehabilitation case proceedings in courts across the country skyrocketed from 116 cases in 2006 to 803 cases in 2012, and to 395 by June 2013 (estimated 830 cases by year end) the number continually increasing each year growing to a scale of 7 times the amount 7 years after the law was implemented, however, the success rate of corporate rehabilitation proceedings of 15.5%(19.1% in the first half of 2013) appeared to be much lower than the success rate of the previous company reorganization act of 66.7%. Quantitatively, this can be evaluated as a positive, yet qualitatively, from the standpoint of the goal of the corporate rehabilitation proceeding, the very low success rate can be seen as a dire problem. For the last 3 years the increase of 860 cases of rehabilitation plans in corporate rehabilitation proceedings in courts across the country for 3 years saw a reduction in the time it took from commencement to approval from 9 months 9 days to 8 months 29 days, a reduced wait time, but when considering the total time it takes from applying and waiting about one month for a commencement decision to be made, and the period it takes for the preparing for the application, it appears to take closer to 1 year. Recently ‘fast track rehabilitation proceedings’ have been run for corporate rehabilitation cases by the court and at the working level, but despite this, it was determined that the main reason for the very low success rate was the extremely long wait time it takes for the progression of the proceedings. Through extensive hands-on experience in corporate rehabilitation work, the author reiterates that more than anything else, the necessity of ‘fast rehabilitation proceedings’ as a factor for the success of corporate rehabilitation, and through taking the direction of reducing wait times to increase the success rate of corporate rehabilitation proceedings the process of stages should be either aggressively reduced, merged, or some stages omitted, and when agencies and organizations perform their role and function of improving the system of legislation and rehabilitation proceedings in the abbreviated ‘fast track rehabilitation system,’ working-level improvements would be necessary to perform fast rehabilitation practices.