학술논문
계층분석적 의사결정을 통한 부실채권 경매제도 개선방안에 관한 연구 / A Study on the Improvement of NPL Auction System using Analytic Hierarchy Process
Document Type
Dissertation/ Thesis
Author
Source
Subject
Language
Korean
Abstract
본 연구는 국내 부실채권경매시장이 활성화 됨에 따라 나타나는 문제점을 살펴본 뒤 이를 개선하기 위한 방안을 도출해보고, AHP방법론을 이용하여 개선방안의 우선순위를 정량적인 방법으로 제시하였다. 개선방안을 도출하기 위하여 문헌정보 및 선행연구 검토와 함께 부동산경매 전문가들을 초빙하여 브레인스토밍을 실시하였으며, 이에 따른 주요결과 및 부실채권 경매제도의 문제점은 다음과 같이 요약할 수 있다. 부실채권 경매제도의 문제점으로는 첫째, 경매연기 신청 남용으로 인한 경매절차 지연 문제, 둘째 양도소득세를 내지 않아 발생하는 세금탈루 문제, 셋째 경매낙찰가율 왜곡문제로 정리할 수 있다. 이에 대한 해결방안으로는 첫째, 경매연기 신청 남용으로 인한 문제점은 NPL 양수인의 연기신청시 이해관계인 동의서 징구, 법원이 인정할만한 타당한 사유 발생시 제한적 연기허용, 기존 2회에서 1회로 연기횟수 제한, 배당요구 종기일까지 연기신청 사전신고제 도입 등의 방안들이 제시 되었다. 둘째, 양도소득세 탈루문제의 해결방안으로는 NPL로 인한 배당소득 발생시 배당소득세 부과, NPL양도양수 계약서의 금액을 근거로 대출실행 및 규제, 양도세 과세기준을 낙찰가격이 아닌 NPL계약금액으로 부과 방안이 제시되었다. 마지막으로 낙찰가율 왜곡문제를 해결하기 위한 방안으로는 NPL양수인의 입찰참여 제한, NPL양수인은 채권최고액 범위내에서만 입찰 가능, NPL양수인의 낙찰시 배당금액 상계처리 제한적 허용, NPL양도양수시 실거래가액 기준으로 채권최고액 재설정등의 방안들이 제시 되었다. 이 후 도출된 개선방안을 바탕으로 AHP설문조사를 진행한 뒤 실증분석 하였고, AHP실증분석결과를 바탕으로 평가요소의 상대적 중요도 및 우선순위를 결정할 수 있었다. 평가요소의 중요도 및 복합가중치의 우선순위를 살펴보면 전문가들은 경매제도 개선방안에 있어 NPL양수인의 연기신청시 이해관계인 동의서 징구(0.324)와 법원이 인정할만한 타당한 사유 발생시 제한적 연기허용(0.165), 기존 2회에서 1회로 연기횟수 제한(0.134)을 매우 중요하게 생각하는 것으로 나타났다. 이 요소들은 경매절차가 지연되는 것을 개선시키는데 큰 영향을 미치는 항목들이다. 그 뒤로 NPL양수인의 낙찰시 배당금액 상계처리 제한적 허용(0.131), NPL로 인한 배당소득 발생시 배당소득세 부과(0.081), NPL양도양수 계약서의 금액을 근거로 대출실행 및 규제(0.053), NPL양도양수시 실거래가액 기준으로 채권최고액 재설정(0.038), 양도세 과세기준을 낙찰가격이 아닌 NPL계약금액(0.027)이 나타났으며, 이는 세금부과 및 낙찰가율 왜곡시정과 관련된 항목들로서 경매절차 지연개선 항목들에 비해 중요도가 낮은 것으로 파악 되었다.
This study is to review issues caused by the activation of domestic non-performing loan auction market, to draw improvement directions for resolving those issues, and to suggest the improvement priorities in a quantitative way by using the AHP methodology. In order to achieve the improvement directions, relevant literature and precedent studies were reviewed, and brain storming was also conducted with real estate auction experts invited. As a result, key findings and main problems of non-performing loan auction system can be summarized as follows. The main problems of non-performing loan auction system are 1) a delay in auction procedure resulted from the abuse of auction delay request, 2) tax evasion occurred by the avoidance of capital gain tax, and 3) the distortion of auction price. The solutions to these problems are suggested: First, for preventing the abuse of auction delay request, stakeholders’ agreements should be submitted when a NPL transferee request for a delay; delays needs to be approved on a limited basis only when court find causes reasonable; the number of delays should be limited from 2 times(currently) to 1 time; and it is necessary to introduce the advance declaration system allowing the delay requests only until the last day of request for distribution. Second, as solutions for the evasion of capital gain tax, imposing dividend income tax in cases where dividend income is made from NPL, executing and regulating loans based on the amounts set on NPL transfer agreements, and assessing NPL contract values, not bid prices, for the capital gain tax are suggested. Lastly, in order to resolve the problem on the distortion of auction price, restricting NPL transferee’s bid, accepting NPL transferee’s bid only within a range of maximum amount of bonds, limitedly allowing dividend offset disposal only when NPL transferee’s bid is accepted, and resetting the maximum amount of bonds based on market prices for transferring NPL are suggested. Based on these improvement directions, AHP survey was conducted and then its results were empirically analyzed. With the results of AHP empirical analysis, relative importance and priorities of evaluated attributes were set. In terms of the importance of the evaluated attributes and the priorities of compound weight, the experts consider submission of stakeholders’ agreements(0.324), approving delays on a limited basis only when court find causes reasonable(0.165), and limiting the number of delays from 2 times to 1 time(0.134) important in improving the auction system. These attributes have great influences on resolving the issue of the delay in auction process. Also, limitedly allowing dividend offset disposal only when NPL transferee’s bid is accepted(0.131), imposing dividend income tax in cases where dividend income is made from NPL(0.081), executing and regulating loans based on the amounts set on NPL transfer agreements(0.053), resetting the maximum amount of bonds based on market prices for transferring NPL(0.038), assessing NPL contract values, not bid prices, for the capital gain tax(0.027) are shown. These attributes are related to the imposition of tax and the distortion of auction price, and they show lower importance than those related to the delay of auction procedure.
This study is to review issues caused by the activation of domestic non-performing loan auction market, to draw improvement directions for resolving those issues, and to suggest the improvement priorities in a quantitative way by using the AHP methodology. In order to achieve the improvement directions, relevant literature and precedent studies were reviewed, and brain storming was also conducted with real estate auction experts invited. As a result, key findings and main problems of non-performing loan auction system can be summarized as follows. The main problems of non-performing loan auction system are 1) a delay in auction procedure resulted from the abuse of auction delay request, 2) tax evasion occurred by the avoidance of capital gain tax, and 3) the distortion of auction price. The solutions to these problems are suggested: First, for preventing the abuse of auction delay request, stakeholders’ agreements should be submitted when a NPL transferee request for a delay; delays needs to be approved on a limited basis only when court find causes reasonable; the number of delays should be limited from 2 times(currently) to 1 time; and it is necessary to introduce the advance declaration system allowing the delay requests only until the last day of request for distribution. Second, as solutions for the evasion of capital gain tax, imposing dividend income tax in cases where dividend income is made from NPL, executing and regulating loans based on the amounts set on NPL transfer agreements, and assessing NPL contract values, not bid prices, for the capital gain tax are suggested. Lastly, in order to resolve the problem on the distortion of auction price, restricting NPL transferee’s bid, accepting NPL transferee’s bid only within a range of maximum amount of bonds, limitedly allowing dividend offset disposal only when NPL transferee’s bid is accepted, and resetting the maximum amount of bonds based on market prices for transferring NPL are suggested. Based on these improvement directions, AHP survey was conducted and then its results were empirically analyzed. With the results of AHP empirical analysis, relative importance and priorities of evaluated attributes were set. In terms of the importance of the evaluated attributes and the priorities of compound weight, the experts consider submission of stakeholders’ agreements(0.324), approving delays on a limited basis only when court find causes reasonable(0.165), and limiting the number of delays from 2 times to 1 time(0.134) important in improving the auction system. These attributes have great influences on resolving the issue of the delay in auction process. Also, limitedly allowing dividend offset disposal only when NPL transferee’s bid is accepted(0.131), imposing dividend income tax in cases where dividend income is made from NPL(0.081), executing and regulating loans based on the amounts set on NPL transfer agreements(0.053), resetting the maximum amount of bonds based on market prices for transferring NPL(0.038), assessing NPL contract values, not bid prices, for the capital gain tax(0.027) are shown. These attributes are related to the imposition of tax and the distortion of auction price, and they show lower importance than those related to the delay of auction procedure.