본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

은행 소유 규제의 현황과 개선 과제

Legal Review on a Bank Ownership Regulation under the Bank Act and its Future Prospects and Tasks in Korea

0

조회

0

다운로드

8

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

This article is to analyze the regulations on a bank ownership under the Bank Act in Korea and to suggest some improvements in respect of legal issues and financial policy matters. Also, this paper reviews the history of regulations of a bank ownership since 1950 when the Bank Act was enacted. The core issue on the bank ownership regulation under the Bank Act is whether a non-financial firm group should be permitted to control a bank, and further, if permitted, how much such ownership should be allowed. Until the amendment of the Bank Act in June 2009 (effective in October 2009), a strict policy on bank ownership by a non-financial group had been taken. However, the 2009 Bank Act amendments allowed a non-financial group to own up to 9% of voting shares of a nationwide commercial bank, increasing from the previous 4% limit, although an approval from a financial regulator should be obtained if such ownership triggers certain conditions. However, this financial policy deregulating the bank ownership restrictions is evaluated not to be desirable in that such policy might incur the negative effects, including that such a non-financial group might abuse its power as a large shareholder, exercise undue influences on the bank, and eventually harm the soundness of the bank as well as the sound financial system. Alternatively, other methods to improve the competitiveness of the bank industry (According to the Government, the improvement of the banks' competitiveness is one of the aims to deregulate the bank ownership restrictions.), may be considered: expanding the scope of bank activities, improving the corporate governance of a bank, and abolishing unnecessary regulations or deregulating strict regulations imposed on banks. Another issue to note is that the control on a bank by a private equity fund ("PEF") should be prohibited in that such PEF in nature seeks to gain profits in the short-term rather than in the long-term, considering that long-term strategies and investments (such as information technology investments) are essential to banking institutions.

Abstract

This article is to analyze the regulations on a bank ownership under the Bank Act in Korea and to suggest some improvements in respect of legal issues and financial policy matters. Also, this paper reviews the history of regulations of a bank ownership since 1950 when the Bank Act was enacted. The core issue on the bank ownership regulation under the Bank Act is whether a non-financial firm group should be permitted to control a bank, and further, if permitted, how much such ownership should be allowed. Until the amendment of the Bank Act in June 2009 (effective in October 2009), a strict policy on bank ownership by a non-financial group had been taken. However, the 2009 Bank Act amendments allowed a non-financial group to own up to 9% of voting shares of a nationwide commercial bank, increasing from the previous 4% limit, although an approval from a financial regulator should be obtained if such ownership triggers certain conditions. However, this financial policy deregulating the bank ownership restrictions is evaluated not to be desirable in that such policy might incur the negative effects, including that such a non-financial group might abuse its power as a large shareholder, exercise undue influences on the bank, and eventually harm the soundness of the bank as well as the sound financial system. Alternatively, other methods to improve the competitiveness of the bank industry (According to the Government, the improvement of the banks' competitiveness is one of the aims to deregulate the bank ownership restrictions.), may be considered: expanding the scope of bank activities, improving the corporate governance of a bank, and abolishing unnecessary regulations or deregulating strict regulations imposed on banks. Another issue to note is that the control on a bank by a private equity fund ("PEF") should be prohibited in that such PEF in nature seeks to gain profits in the short-term rather than in the long-term, considering that long-term strategies and investments (such as information technology investments) are essential to banking institutions.

참고문헌 (24)

  1. 금융위원회, "은행 주식 보유 규제 합리화 방안, 보도참고자료", ~ (2008)
  2. 이병화, "축조해설 은행법" (2008), 삼우사
  3. 이상제, "은행 소유 규제 제도 현황과 논점", 한국금융연구원 정책세미나 발표자료 (2008)
  4. 한국은행, "우리나라의 금융제도" (1999)
  5. 은행법 중 개정 법률안 심사보고서, "국회 재무위원회", ~ (1982)
  6. "은행법 개정 이유"[URL]
  7. 고동원, "금융규제와 법" (2008), 박영사
  8. 김용재, "銀行株式 所有規制에 관한 一考", 기업법연구, 20(1), pp.177~202 (2006), 한국기업법학회
  9. 김용재, "銀行規制의 바람직한 모습 —美國에서의 銀産分離政策을 모델로 하여—", 금융법연구, 5(2), pp.3~36 (2008), 한국금융법학회
  10. 정찬형, "주석 금융법 I (은행법)", pp.187~189 (2007), 한국사법행정학회
  11. 고동원, "은행 소유 규제 완화와 관련한2008년 은행법 개정안의 법적 문제와 개선 방안", 은행법연구, 1(2), pp.195~239 (2008), 은행법학회
  12. 정찬형, "은행법상 금산분리의 문제점 및 개선 방안", 저스티스, 통권 : 104, pp.6~26 (2008), 한국법학원
  13. 김용재, "산업자본의 은행소유와 관련한 법적 쟁점", 증권법연구, 2(2) (2001), 한국증권법학회
  14. 윤창현, "금산분리제도의 현황과 과제: 금산분리완화를 중심으로", 저스티스, 통권 : 104, pp.28~40 (2008), 한국법학원
  15. 윤창현, "금산분리 원칙은 완화되어야 한다", 월간 금융, 통권 : 647, pp.16~23 (2008), 전국은행연합회
  16. 남주하, "금산분리 완화: 논리적 근거와 정책 방향", 2008년도 한국금융학회 춘계 정책심포지움 발표자료, pp.1~42 (2008)
  17. 이상묵, "산업자본과 금융자본간 분리의 논거 및 그 비용에 대한 고찰: 산업의 금융지배 문제를 중심으로", 산업조직연구, 12(2), pp.59~82 (2004), 한국산업조직학회
  18. 이병윤, "산업자본과 금융자본 분리의 논리", BFL, (16) (2006), 서울대학교 금융법센터
  19. 전성인, "산업자본과 금융자본의 분리에 관한 제도적 검토 : 한국과 미국의 경우를 중심으로", 산업조직연구, 12(2), pp.83~113 (2004), 한국산업조직학회
  20. 전성인, "금융과 산업의 분리: 이론과 정책 과제", 2008년도 한국금융학회 춘계 정책심포지움 발표 자료, pp.1~28 (2008)
  21. 김선웅, "금산분리 원칙은 강화되어야한다", 월간 금융, 통권 : 647, pp.24~31 (2008), 전국은행연합회
  22. "중앙일보", ~
  23. Policy Statement on Equity Investments in Banks and Bank Holding Companies, "Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System", ~ (2008)
  24. 성태윤, "은산분리에 대한 몇 가지 논점: 미국의 경험과 감독기구 기능을 중심으로", 제61차 한국경제의 분석 패널 발표문 (2009)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (13건)