The middle-title-omitted registration title trust is title trust where the title trustor buys real estate property from a seller while registering it in the name of the title trustee. Hitherto, when the trustee disposes of the trust property to a third party at his or her discretion in the middle-title-omitted registration title trust, the Supreme Court took the position that the trustee is held liable for torts to the trustor, because the trustee's act of disposition establishes a case of embezzlement in Criminal Law in relation to the trustor. However, the Supreme Court changed its position recently: the trustee’s action does not constitute embezzlement in relation to the trustor according to the ruling of the Supreme Court en banc Decision 2014Do6992 Decided May 19, 2016. The rationale is the seller holds the ownership of the trust property based on the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder's Name, so the trustor is not the owner of the trust property, nor is the trust relationship between the trustor and the trustee recognized. Even if there is a de facto trust relationship, this trust is not worth protecting through Criminal Law, according to the Supreme Court From the civil law point of view, the trustee's action does not violate the ownership of the trustor, nor does it violate the trust relationship with the trustor, which means that it is not a tort against the trustor. Although not mentioned in this Supreme Court Decision, it is also necessary to examine whether the trustee's action is illegal against the seller. As the seller loses the ownership of the trust property, it may appear that the legal requirements of infringing on the seller 's ownership rights are fully met. In this regard, the existing theory is that the tort liability of the trustee is contingent upon the seller's damages, recognizing an illegal infringement of ownership against the seller. However, as the seller disposes of the trust property by choice and acquires the corresponding consideration, technically the trustee's disposition cannot be considered unlawful just because the seller has lost the ownership. Furthermore, while the owner of the trust property is the seller, as the trust relationship does not exist between the seller and the trustee, the trustee's act of disposition does not constitute embezzlement against the seller. Consequently, the trustee's disposition is not to be regarded as an illegal act that violates the ownership of the seller. It may be considered that the trustee's act of disposition infringes on the contractual rights of the trustor to the seller, which is a violation of the contractual rights by third party. However, the contractual rights of the trustor against the seller exist only conceptually, not in fact, and it cannot be said that the trustee had the intention to infringe on the contractual rights. In addition, considering the fact that the trustee's disposition is not regarded as an act of using a corrupt means, and the disposition of the trust property in "contract title trust" in which the seller knows the existence of the title trust agreement, which is similar to the middle-title-omitted registration title trust is not a tort, the trustee's act of disposition is not a violation of the contractual rights by third party. In conclusion, there is no basis for regarding the trustee’s disposition of trust property as a tort, and this is in line with the legislative intent of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name to discourage the occurrence of title trust for real estate.