본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

상법상 조직변경과 반대주주의 주식매수청구권 - 법원에 의한 공정한 가액산정과 관련하여 -

A study of corporate transformation and appraisal right of dissenting shareholders

0

조회

0

다운로드

18

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

Commercial law allows dissenting shareholders appraisal right to sell his or her shares back to the corporation at a “fair value” in the event that a fundamental change occurs in the corporation. Since this legal activity has a significant effect on the corporate structure and its shareholders, disposal of its shares can cause a conflict of interests among shareholders. Corporate transformation requires special resolution at shareholders' meeting, and shareholders who consent or dissent the agenda are likely to have different interests. In the Korean commercial law, dissenting shareholders have appraisal right in the case of corporate transformation or amendment of articles. When the dissenting shareholders ask the company to buy his or her shares, the company talks with them over the price and buys the shares at a fair value. To exercise the right, the dissenting shareholders must give a written notice before the shareholders' meeting except small scale of merger and share trading. They can also dissent in person at the meeting. Not only those who have voting rights in the meeting but also those who don't are allowed the dissenters' right, which is a common view in Korea. The appraisal right is becoming more important because it serves to check special resolution at the shareholders's meeting. The right can be viewed to provide fair profit between major and miner shareholders. The law says the company should buy the shares at a fair value if the company and dissenting shareholders don't have agreement on the value, and so there are arguments over how the fair value is determined, regarding which the court position is not clear. Although there are different opinions over whether the dissenter's right should be allowed in the law or not: some argue the right is necessary and others don't agree with that, I would rather say it is necessary in the consideration that the big reason the right is allowed is to protect minor shareholders from major shareholders.

Abstract

Commercial law allows dissenting shareholders appraisal right to sell his or her shares back to the corporation at a “fair value” in the event that a fundamental change occurs in the corporation. Since this legal activity has a significant effect on the corporate structure and its shareholders, disposal of its shares can cause a conflict of interests among shareholders. Corporate transformation requires special resolution at shareholders' meeting, and shareholders who consent or dissent the agenda are likely to have different interests. In the Korean commercial law, dissenting shareholders have appraisal right in the case of corporate transformation or amendment of articles. When the dissenting shareholders ask the company to buy his or her shares, the company talks with them over the price and buys the shares at a fair value. To exercise the right, the dissenting shareholders must give a written notice before the shareholders' meeting except small scale of merger and share trading. They can also dissent in person at the meeting. Not only those who have voting rights in the meeting but also those who don't are allowed the dissenters' right, which is a common view in Korea. The appraisal right is becoming more important because it serves to check special resolution at the shareholders's meeting. The right can be viewed to provide fair profit between major and miner shareholders. The law says the company should buy the shares at a fair value if the company and dissenting shareholders don't have agreement on the value, and so there are arguments over how the fair value is determined, regarding which the court position is not clear. Although there are different opinions over whether the dissenter's right should be allowed in the law or not: some argue the right is necessary and others don't agree with that, I would rather say it is necessary in the consideration that the big reason the right is allowed is to protect minor shareholders from major shareholders.

참고문헌 (14)

  1. 정찬형, "상법강의(상)(제16판)" (2013), 박영사
  2. 권기범, "제3개정판 기업구조조정법" (2002), 삼지원
  3. 손주찬, "상법(상)" (2004), 박영사
  4. 이철송, "회사법강의" (2013), 박영사
  5. 임재연, "자본시장법" (2011), 박영사
  6. 강헌, "상법상 주식매수청구권제도의 문제점", 상사법연구, 21(2), pp.10~420 (2002), 한국상사법학회
  7. 권기범, "현행 주식매수청구권에 관한 몇가지 문제점", 상사법 연구, 7 (1989)
  8. 김근수, "주식매수청구권 행사 결정요인에 대한 분석", Asia-Pacific Journal of Financial Studies, 36(3), pp.463~494 (2007), 한국증권학회
  9. 김성진, "소수주주의 주식매수청구권 박탈로 인한 주주총회결의의 무효 여부 - 대법원 2010. 7. 22. 선고 2008다37193 판결(분할합병무효 등)을 중심으로 -", 기업법연구, 25(3), pp.95~117 (2011), 한국기업법학회
  10. 김진욱, "주식매수청구권제도 개선의 필요성 - 자본시장법상의 주식매수청구권 특례조항을 중심으로 -", 기업법연구, 24(3), pp.161~192 (2010), 한국기업법학회
  11. 박준, "주식매수청구권-상법개정에 관한 연구" (1994), 한국증권업협회
  12. 상홍규, "총회결의반대주주의 주식매수청구권의 범위", 기업법연구, 3 (1998)
  13. 양기진, "반대주주의 주식매수청구권에 관한 연구", 기업법연구, 26(1), pp.185~219 (2012), 한국기업법학회
  14. 土田亮, "合併比率の公正確保と株主代表訴訟, In 田村諄之輔先生古稀記念 企業結合法の現代的課題と展開" (2002), 商事法務

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (14건)