주식매수청구권에 관한 연구
A Study on the Dissenting Shareholder’s Appraisal Right
0
조회
0
다운로드
20
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
It became nowadays very easy for everyone in Korea to find a reportage on the dissenting shareholder’s appraisal right released by various mass media. Almost all nations over the world acknowledge today this institute to provide an effective tool for the minority protection. In recent years the courts in Korea have released some meaningful decisions on the stock valuation in the wake of the exercising the dissenters’ appraisal right. In this article the author tries at first a general scanning over this legal institute. He analyses the meaning, the function, the requirements for a successful exercise and the effect of it. And he goes in furtherance to some important issues on it ; the market-out exception, the effect of exercising the right and the stock valuation aftermath. At first he goes on the market-out exception. In United States fast half of all the states have this exception. The state of Delaware is eager to introduce this exception, following the Manning’s contention (“The Shareholder’s Appraisal Remedy ; An Essay For Frank Coker”, 72 Yale L. J. 223 [1962]). The author points out, in especially, the problems surrounding the valuation of listed stocks. As Wertheimer and Eisenberg emphasized, he says that the informational asymmetry between the controlling and minority shareholders gives rise to an unreliability of market price. So he says the market-out exception should not be so widespread in Korea as in the U. S. After the issue of market-out exception he tries to go onto the second issue and to show some ways of interpretation on the words of “two months” in s. 374-2 II KCC(Korean Commercial Code). He acknowledges the liability of the company to compensate the delay, if it fails the payment after that period. Finally the author points out also the need for a rapid development surrounding the valuation of listed stocks. Not only the Delaware Block Approach but also the modern valuation methods worldwide are urgently to be introduced into the court’s practice in Korea. In furtherance he emphasizes the recent cases in Japan. In the year of 2011 and 2012, the Japanese Highest Court released three important decisions on the valuation of listed stocks in the wake of reorganization ; the ‘Koei-Tecmo Case’, the ‘Rakuten v. TBS Case’ and ‘the Intelligence Case’. He finds there any sort of judicial innovation on the stock valuation.
Abstract
It became nowadays very easy for everyone in Korea to find a reportage on the dissenting shareholder’s appraisal right released by various mass media. Almost all nations over the world acknowledge today this institute to provide an effective tool for the minority protection. In recent years the courts in Korea have released some meaningful decisions on the stock valuation in the wake of the exercising the dissenters’ appraisal right. In this article the author tries at first a general scanning over this legal institute. He analyses the meaning, the function, the requirements for a successful exercise and the effect of it. And he goes in furtherance to some important issues on it ; the market-out exception, the effect of exercising the right and the stock valuation aftermath. At first he goes on the market-out exception. In United States fast half of all the states have this exception. The state of Delaware is eager to introduce this exception, following the Manning’s contention (“The Shareholder’s Appraisal Remedy ; An Essay For Frank Coker”, 72 Yale L. J. 223 [1962]). The author points out, in especially, the problems surrounding the valuation of listed stocks. As Wertheimer and Eisenberg emphasized, he says that the informational asymmetry between the controlling and minority shareholders gives rise to an unreliability of market price. So he says the market-out exception should not be so widespread in Korea as in the U. S. After the issue of market-out exception he tries to go onto the second issue and to show some ways of interpretation on the words of “two months” in s. 374-2 II KCC(Korean Commercial Code). He acknowledges the liability of the company to compensate the delay, if it fails the payment after that period. Finally the author points out also the need for a rapid development surrounding the valuation of listed stocks. Not only the Delaware Block Approach but also the modern valuation methods worldwide are urgently to be introduced into the court’s practice in Korea. In furtherance he emphasizes the recent cases in Japan. In the year of 2011 and 2012, the Japanese Highest Court released three important decisions on the valuation of listed stocks in the wake of reorganization ; the ‘Koei-Tecmo Case’, the ‘Rakuten v. TBS Case’ and ‘the Intelligence Case’. He finds there any sort of judicial innovation on the stock valuation.
참고문헌 (38)
- 강헌, "반대주주의 주식매수청구권에 관한 연구", 박사, 법학, pp.2002
- 권기범, "현대회사법론" (2012), 삼영사
- 김건식, "회사법" (2015), 박영사
- 김근수, "주식매수청구권 행사 결정요인에 대한 분석", Asia-Pacific Journal of Financial Studies, 36(3), pp.463~494 (2007), 한국증권학회
- 김진욱, "주식매수청구권제도 개선의 필요성 - 자본시장법상의 주식매수청구권 특례조항을 중심으로 -", 기업법연구, 24(3), pp.161~192 (2010), 한국기업법학회
- 김홍기, "현행 주식가치평가의 법적 쟁점과 ‘공정한 가액’에 관한 연구", 상사법연구, 30(1), pp.159~205 (2011), 한국상사법학회
- 류해필, "합병기업의 주식매수청구권 행사결정요인과 장기성과", 재무관리연구, 30(4), pp.195~224 (2013), 한국재무관리학회
- 송종준, "개정 상법상 소수주주의 탈퇴와 축출에 있어서 주식가격 보상기준의 공정화 방안", 선진상사법률연구, (69), pp.45~84 (2015), 법무부
- 안택식, "반대주주의 주식매수청구권의 문제점", 경영법률, 24(4), pp.1~32 (2014), 한국경영법률학회
- 양기진, "반대주주의 주식매수청구권에 관한 연구", 기업법연구, 26(1), pp.185~219 (2012), 한국기업법학회
- 양만식, "상법상 조직변경과 반대주주의 주식매수청구권 － 법원에 의한 공정한 가액산정과 관련하여 －", 경영법률, 23(4), pp.155~184 (2013), 한국경영법률학회
- 엄세용, "주식매수청구권 법제비교 및 개선방향 연구", 증권법연구, 14(2), pp.165~205 (2013), 한국증권법학회
- 오창석, "주식매수청구권의 행사와 매수가격결정에 관한 연구", 법학논총, 24, pp.307~329 (2010), 법학연구소
- 이기수, "회사법" (2008), 박영사
- 이철송, "회사법강의" (2015), 박영사
- 이형근, "주식회사법 대계( I )", pp.900~941 (2013), 법문사간
- 임재연, "자본시장법" (2013), 박영사
- 장덕조, "회사법" (2015), 법문사
- 정동윤, "상법(상)" (2012), 법문사
- 정찬형, "상법강의(상)" (2015), 박영사
- 최준선, "회사법" (2014), 삼영사
- 황의동, "반대주주 주식매수청구권의 법적 성격과 회사의 매수의무에 대한 소고, 대판 2011. 4. 28, 2010 다94953", 법학평론, 2, pp.342~377 (2011)
- 藤原總一郞, "株式買取請求の法務と稅務" (2011), 中央經濟社
- 神田秀樹, "會社法" (2014), 弘文堂
- 江頭憲治郞, "論点體系, 會社法 I (總則, 株式會社 I)"
- 矢吹保博, "株式買取價格決定申立てにおける株主側の負擔", 法と經濟のジヤ―ナル, 朝日新聞 DIGITAL, 2011, 02, pp.2011, ~
- 十市 崇, "樂天對TBS株式買取價格決定申立事件", 判例タイムズ, No. 1370 (2012. 12. 1.), 14~25 (2012)
- Allen, "Commentaries and Cases on the Law of Business Organization" (2007), Wolters Kluwer
- American Law Institute, "The Principles of Corporate Governance - Analysis and Recommendation -, Vol. I, Vol. II" (1994), American Law Institute Publishers
- Cross, "Law and Corporate Finance" (2007), Edward Elgar
- Eisenberg (Melvin Aron), "The Structure of the Corporation, A Legal Analysis" (1976), Little, Brown & Co.
- Gilson, "The Mechanisms of Market Efficiency", Va. L. Rev, 70, pp.549~ (1984)
- Haas (Jeffrey J.), "Corporate Finance in a Nutshell", pp.2004, Thomson
- Koh (Alan K.), "Appraising Japan’s Appraisal Remedy", American Journal of Comparative Law, 2, pp.417~460 (2014)
- Manning, "The Shareholder’s Appraisal Remedy ; An Essay For Frank Coker", Yale L. J., 72, pp.223~ (1962)
- Notes, "Valuation of Dissenters’ Stock under Appraisal Statutes", Harv. L. Rev, 79, pp.1453~
- Siegel (Mary), "Back to the Future : Appraisal Right in the Twenty-first Century", Harv. J. on Legis, 32, pp.126~ (1995)
- Wertheimer (Barry), "The Shareholders’ Appraisal Remedy and How Courts Determine Fair Value", Duke L. J, 47, pp.613~