본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

독일의 회사법제 운용경과와 시사점-최근 한국의 지배구조의 논의와 비교를 중심으로-

The Operation History and Suggestions of German Corporate Law -Focused on Comparative Study with Recent Korean Corporate Governance Discussions-

6

조회

0

다운로드

5

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

The discussion about corporate governance is going on. Corporate governance is the relationship among various participants in determining the direction and performance of corporations. In korea, there were severe reform discussions on corporate governance in the year of 2013. The 5 topics were dealed with by the ministry of justice: partial compulsion of executive officer, compulsion of cumulative voting, multiple derivative suit, compulsion of electronic voting system, separated appointment of members of auditing committee. There were powerful resistance from the economic world. After that, the ministry of justice has taken a step backwards. But the discussions are now going on. We should solve he problems on corporate governance wisely. We should adopt also the global trend. We can look at german experience. In the year of 2000 the code of best practice was created by civil committee in germany. The german government has also provided Deutscher Corporate Governance Kodex(2002). After that, the german legislators have enacted the so-called comply or explain rule in § 161 Aktiengesetz(stock-law). Member of board of directors and auditing committee should apply the german corporate governance Kodex. When they did not apply the Kodex, then they should explain the reasons. The investors can decide according to the notice. When infringing contents against german Kodex was decided by a majority shareholders in general meeting of stockholders, the decision can be canceled afterwards. But the members of board of directors and auditing committee do not take responsibility for compensation for damage because of that conduct. In extreme case, the members can be responsible according to the rule of explanation of project. The corporate governance discussion goes to similar ways worldwide. There are also some divergence because of the customs and legal traditions of each country. We should try further to get best corporate governance system that is suitable for our corporate character. Thereby the soft law system can be useful solution. By the time, we can get a considerable reference from german corporate governance Kodex and its force.

Abstract

The discussion about corporate governance is going on. Corporate governance is the relationship among various participants in determining the direction and performance of corporations. In korea, there were severe reform discussions on corporate governance in the year of 2013. The 5 topics were dealed with by the ministry of justice: partial compulsion of executive officer, compulsion of cumulative voting, multiple derivative suit, compulsion of electronic voting system, separated appointment of members of auditing committee. There were powerful resistance from the economic world. After that, the ministry of justice has taken a step backwards. But the discussions are now going on. We should solve he problems on corporate governance wisely. We should adopt also the global trend. We can look at german experience. In the year of 2000 the code of best practice was created by civil committee in germany. The german government has also provided Deutscher Corporate Governance Kodex(2002). After that, the german legislators have enacted the so-called comply or explain rule in § 161 Aktiengesetz(stock-law). Member of board of directors and auditing committee should apply the german corporate governance Kodex. When they did not apply the Kodex, then they should explain the reasons. The investors can decide according to the notice. When infringing contents against german Kodex was decided by a majority shareholders in general meeting of stockholders, the decision can be canceled afterwards. But the members of board of directors and auditing committee do not take responsibility for compensation for damage because of that conduct. In extreme case, the members can be responsible according to the rule of explanation of project. The corporate governance discussion goes to similar ways worldwide. There are also some divergence because of the customs and legal traditions of each country. We should try further to get best corporate governance system that is suitable for our corporate character. Thereby the soft law system can be useful solution. By the time, we can get a considerable reference from german corporate governance Kodex and its force.

참고문헌 (27)

  1. 김건식, "회사법 제4판" (2013), 박영사
  2. 김정호, "회사법 제2판" (2012), 법문사
  3. 법무부, "상법 회사편 해설, 상법해설서 시리즈 Ⅱ" (2012)
  4. 송옥렬, "상법강의 제3판" (2013), 홍문사
  5. 이기수, "회사법 제9판" (2011), 박영사
  6. 이철송, "회사법강의 제21판" (2013), 박영사
  7. 정찬형, "상법강의(상)제16판" (2013), 박영사
  8. 최기원, "신회사법론 제14대정판" (2012), 박영사
  9. 최준선, "회사법 제8판" (2013), 삼영사
  10. 최준선, "2011 개정상법 회사편 해설" (2011), 한국상장회사협의회
  11. 한국상사법학회, "주식회사법대계(I)" (2013), 법문사
  12. 홍복기, "회사법사례와 이론" (2012), 박영사
  13. Grunewald, "Gesellschaftsrecht, 8. Aufl." (2011)
  14. Raiser, "Recht der Kapitalgesellschaften, 5. Aufl." (2010), München
  15. Thomas clarke, "corporate governance - critical perspectives on business and management vol. I" (2005)
  16. 김은경, "독일의 2012년 개정 주식법에 관한 소고", 상사법연구, 31(1), pp.221~249 (2012), 한국상사법학회[DOI]
  17. 권재열, "2013년 상법상 다중대표소송 도입안에 관한비교법적 검토", 증권법연구, 14(2), pp.89~113 (2013), 한국증권법학회
  18. 김정호, "이중대표소송에 대한 연구", 경영법률, 17(1), pp.221~290 (2006), 한국경영법률학회
  19. 박수영, "집중투표제도 의무화 -상법개정시안중 집중투표제도의 의무화에 대한 반론-", 기업법연구, 27(3), pp.115~139 (2013), 한국기업법학회
  20. 서완석, "집행임원제도의 제한적 의무화에 관한 쟁점사항 검토", 상법개정안의 주요쟁점과 그 평가, 한국경제법학회 하계학술대회 자료집, pp.119~165 (2013)
  21. 송종준, "지배지분율에 따른 새로운 기업지배구조모델의 제언", 기업지배구조리뷰, (57), pp.32~44 (2011), 한국기업지배구조원
  22. 송호신, "2013년 상법개정안의 고찰과 합리적인 개정방안", 법과정책연구, 13(3), pp.803~841 (2013), 한국법정책학회
  23. 유진희, "이중대표소송의 도입에 관한 입법론적 고찰", 상사판례연구, 19(4), pp.121~153 (2006), 한국상사판례학회
  24. 이훈종, "다중대표소송의 입법화에 관한 연구", 법과정책연구, 13(3), pp.1031~1050 (2013), 한국법정책학회
  25. 정성숙, "이사보수의 공개에 관한 독일과 우리나라의 입법동향", 일감법학, (18), pp.287~326 (2010), 법학연구소
  26. 최병규, "독일의 최근 회사법 개정 동향과 시사점", 경영법률, 22(4), pp.119~145 (2012), 한국경영법률학회[DOI]
  27. 최준선, "감사위원의 분리선임에 관한 쟁점사항 검토", 상법개정안의 주요쟁점과 그 평가, 한국경제법학회 하계학술대회 자료집, pp.3~22 (2013)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (20건)