論中國大陸信託關係之定位及相關法律問題

A Study on the Definition of Trust Relationship and Related Issues of Trust Law in China

系所名稱：法律學系碩士在職專班中國大陸法律組 學位別：碩士 畢業學年：98年 指導教授：王志誠 中國大陸信託法參照大陸法系日本信託法之概念，對於信託關係之定位，已能掌握大陸法系信託法之精要，就是將英美法信託法中「名義所有權」或稱「法律上之所有權」(legal title) 與「實質所有權」或稱「衡平法上之所有權」(equitable title) 之區分，轉化為「所有」和「享有」之分離，即表明信託含有「所有」之物權性質與「享有」之債權性質，並將信託關係之本質定位為具有物權關係和債權關係的雙重性質之法律行為，已能初步發揮信託之功能。惟中國大陸信託法亦承繼大陸法系日本信託法對信託關係成立要件之規定，造成信託制度之僵化，中國大陸信託法要求所有的信託成立都必須適用相同的法律框架，因此造成信託功能發揮之限制，中國大陸學者雖知問題之所在，但囿於對於信託關係定位解釋之困難，理論上一直無法有所突破，僅能從英美法系之觀點闡釋信託之功用，而無法根本解決其理論上定位之問題，本文因此分就中國大陸信託關係之性質、成立、期間、主體之承繼等相關問題提出討論，以尋求中國大陸信託關係之定位，並認為現階段若仍無法達成共識，則應俟累積足夠之案例後，再回頭尋求共識。日本最近信託法之修正，很明顯可看出，該法並未對長期以來信託關係定位最有爭議之部分尋求法理之解決，而是從實務出發，發揮信託之靈活性，例如受託人得約定減輕忠實義務、公平義務及善良管理人義務等規定，並引進新種信託制度，如限定責任信託、目的信託等，此種方式或可為中國大陸未來信託法修法時之參考。

The trust law of mainland China refers the idea of Japan trust law. About the orientation in trust relationship, China trust law had caught the main idea in civil law system. When mainland China legislates trust law, legislators transform the difference between legal title and equitable title in common law to the difference between ownership and possession in civil law. China trust law contains ownership in property and possession in obligation and defines dual properties in law activities. This new law may work in trust activity.Although the new trust law in China has a lot of merits, it still has some problems. The main problem is trust system becomes rigid. The reason that makestrust system rigidly is necessary conditions for trust relationships. The China trust law refers the necessary conditions in Japan trust law. It makes limitation about trust function. Even though this problem exists in China trust law, scholars only explain the true function about trust by common law point of view. They cannot solve the problem in trust law theory. In this thesis we try to analyze trust relationship in China from basic properties and time period of execution. Form our analysis, we try to redefine the trust relationships in mainland China. Because some of relationships still cannot be defined in this time, we suggestion to redefine these controversies after more cases accumulated.From the revision of Japan trust law, we can find that this revision do not change the controvertible parts by the legal principle. The legislators in Japan revise Japan trust law following the empirical cases. They want to produce flexible effects in Japan trust law. For instance, trustees can agree to mitigate duty of care, duty of loyalty and fiduciary duty. In addition to mitigate duty, trustees allow to introduce the new system in trust law, like limited trust and purpose trust. The revision of Japan trust law may be used for references to revise China trust law in the future.