본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

자본시장법상 집합투자기구 운영체계의 재검토

Redesign of the Regulatory Framework in the Collective Investment Scheme

0

조회

0

다운로드

10

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

To eliminate loopholes in the regulatory system and expand the coverage of investor protection Capital Market Act(CMA) has diversified the legal form of existing collective investment scheme(CIS) that had been restricted in investment trust and investment company. This change in the CIS is very desirable in that the Act provides investors with attractive investment products that hold diverse structure caused by broad autonomy of investors. However, the Act has not satisfied expectations of the collective investment market yet. Most of all, the reorganization of regulatory structure for the CIS is urgently being called for. The aim of the CMA is not to establish new investment vehicles but to approve existing investment vehicles as the CIS. Thus, the CIS should be defined comprehensively to embrace diverse investment vehicles such as the examples shown in UK, US and Japan. In introducing a new type of the CIS we need to consider small scale of the vehicles or the nature of personal company and partnership in which the investor protection system is insufficient. In practice, a new type of CIS cannot help establishing and operating in private funds. Therefore, the provisions of the new type of CIS should be revised in coincide with this feature. Also the regulation on equity securities need to be redefined. It is desirable that the equity in the CIS is directly defined as a securities because it qualifies all elements of securities. The introducing of equity securities unpermitted in Commercial Law and Civil Law is unnecessary. And the current provisions on the CMA stipulating the certificated equity securities could be abolished. It’s not certain whether the new type of the CIS could be established and operated well under the current CMA or not. Moreover, The aims of the Act to vitalize collective investment and reinforce investor protection could be more difficult to be achieved. We hope that the legal environment will be improved as soon as possible.

Abstract

To eliminate loopholes in the regulatory system and expand the coverage of investor protection Capital Market Act(CMA) has diversified the legal form of existing collective investment scheme(CIS) that had been restricted in investment trust and investment company. This change in the CIS is very desirable in that the Act provides investors with attractive investment products that hold diverse structure caused by broad autonomy of investors. However, the Act has not satisfied expectations of the collective investment market yet. Most of all, the reorganization of regulatory structure for the CIS is urgently being called for. The aim of the CMA is not to establish new investment vehicles but to approve existing investment vehicles as the CIS. Thus, the CIS should be defined comprehensively to embrace diverse investment vehicles such as the examples shown in UK, US and Japan. In introducing a new type of the CIS we need to consider small scale of the vehicles or the nature of personal company and partnership in which the investor protection system is insufficient. In practice, a new type of CIS cannot help establishing and operating in private funds. Therefore, the provisions of the new type of CIS should be revised in coincide with this feature. Also the regulation on equity securities need to be redefined. It is desirable that the equity in the CIS is directly defined as a securities because it qualifies all elements of securities. The introducing of equity securities unpermitted in Commercial Law and Civil Law is unnecessary. And the current provisions on the CMA stipulating the certificated equity securities could be abolished. It’s not certain whether the new type of the CIS could be established and operated well under the current CMA or not. Moreover, The aims of the Act to vitalize collective investment and reinforce investor protection could be more difficult to be achieved. We hope that the legal environment will be improved as soon as possible.

참고문헌 (19)

  1. 법령제정 실무작업반, "간접투자 해설" (2005), 박영사
  2. 변제호, "자본시장법" (2009), 지원출판사
  3. 이중기, "신탁법" (2007), 삼우사
  4. 김정호, "상법총칙·상행위법" (2008), 法文社
  5. 정찬형, "상법강의(상)" (2008), 박영사
  6. 장근영, "자본시장법 주석서" (2009), 박영사
  7. 大崎貞和, "(解說)金融商品取引法" (2007), 弘文堂
  8. 金融審議會, "投資サービスを向けて", ~ (2005)
  9. 證券取引法硏究會, "集團投資スキームに關する規制について", ~ (2005)
  10. 集團投資スキームに關するワーキンググループ レボート, "集團投資スキーム ワーキンググループ", ~ (2000)
  11. Lee Gremillion, "Mutual Fund Industry Handbook", National Investment Company Service Association, ~ (2005)
  12. Examination of Governance for Collective Investment Schemes, "IOSCO", ~ (2006)
  13. 박정훈, "사모투자전문회사 도입배경 및 경과", BFL, (10) (2005), 서울대학교 금융법센터
  14. 심인숙, "미국 연방증권법상 ‘출자처분’(Equity Interests)- 소위 자본시장통합법상 ‘지분증권’ 개념과의 비교법적 검토 -", 비교사법, 13(4), pp.163~232 (2006), 한국비교사법학회
  15. 이중기, "투자신탁펀드의 지배구조 에 관한 비교법적 연구", 증권법연구, 2(2) (2001), 한국증권법학회
  16. 정대익, "상법개정안상 새로운 기업유형에 대한 검토", 상사법연구, 28(3), pp.75~126 (2009), 한국상사법학회
  17. 정순섭, "포괄주의에 따른 증권 개념의 확장", 투신, (60) (2006), 자산운용협회
  18. 조상욱, "자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률(안)상 집합투자규제의 주요내용 및 문제점", BFL, (22) (2007), 서울대학교 금융법센터
  19. 黑沼悅郞, "金融商品取引法の適用範圍と開示制度", 金融法務事情, (1779) (2006), 金融財政事情硏究會

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (21건)