이사의 내부통제제도 구축의무와 법적 책임- 일본 판례법상의 전개를 중심으로 -
An Analysis of Internal Control Liabilities in Japanese Cases
0
조회
0
다운로드
16
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper examines responsibilities for a company’s internal controls in Japanese Cases. Generally, internal control system is defined as a process affected by an organization's structure, work and authority flows, people and management information systems, designed to help the organization accomplish specific goals or objectives. It is a means by which an organization's resources are directed, monitored, and measured. It plays an important role in detecting and preventing fraud and protecting the organization's resources, both physical and intangible. Management is accountable to the board of directors, which provides governance, guidance and oversight. Effective board members are objective, capable and inquisitive. They also have a knowledge of the entity's activities and environment, and commit the time necessary to fulfill their board responsibilities. Management may be in a position to override controls and ignore or stifle communications from subordinates, enabling a dishonest management which intentionally misrepresents results to cover its tracks. A strong, active board, particularly when coupled with effective upward communications channels and capable financial, legal and internal audit functions, is often best able to identify and correct such a problem. In the decision of Osaka District Court (Daiwa bank case), the Court found that the directors of Daiwa bank had a duty to establish a proper risk management system. Japan forged new legal regime for internal control systems in Japanese Corporation Code. Also, the number of cases developed about company's internal control liability with Daiwa bank case. This paper provides a historical overview of the courts' application of the internal control systems. Also, it looks at how the Japanese courts have attempted to apply laws for specific cases.
Abstract
This paper examines responsibilities for a company’s internal controls in Japanese Cases. Generally, internal control system is defined as a process affected by an organization's structure, work and authority flows, people and management information systems, designed to help the organization accomplish specific goals or objectives. It is a means by which an organization's resources are directed, monitored, and measured. It plays an important role in detecting and preventing fraud and protecting the organization's resources, both physical and intangible. Management is accountable to the board of directors, which provides governance, guidance and oversight. Effective board members are objective, capable and inquisitive. They also have a knowledge of the entity's activities and environment, and commit the time necessary to fulfill their board responsibilities. Management may be in a position to override controls and ignore or stifle communications from subordinates, enabling a dishonest management which intentionally misrepresents results to cover its tracks. A strong, active board, particularly when coupled with effective upward communications channels and capable financial, legal and internal audit functions, is often best able to identify and correct such a problem. In the decision of Osaka District Court (Daiwa bank case), the Court found that the directors of Daiwa bank had a duty to establish a proper risk management system. Japan forged new legal regime for internal control systems in Japanese Corporation Code. Also, the number of cases developed about company's internal control liability with Daiwa bank case. This paper provides a historical overview of the courts' application of the internal control systems. Also, it looks at how the Japanese courts have attempted to apply laws for specific cases.
참고문헌 (63)
- 이철송, "회사법" (2012), 박영사
- 최준선, "회사법 제8판" (2013), 삼영사
- 내부통제제도 및 내부회계관리제도의 법적 정비방안, "최준선", 내부회계관리제도운영위원회, ~ (2011)
- 한국상사법학회, "주식회사법대계" (2013), 법문사
- 권종호, "기업내부통제제도의 바람직한 입법방향", 기업법연구, 25(4), pp.127~154 (2011), 한국기업법학회
- 박세화, "내부통제에 대한 규제와 내부통제 수단으로서의 종류주식에 대한 법적 고찰 - 일본에서의 논의를 중심으로 -", 법학연구, 18(3), pp.101~125 (2008), 법학연구원
- 서완석, "내부통제시스템의 본질과 내부통제의무 위반에 대한 법적 책임", 상사법연구, 31(2), pp.271~329 (2012), 한국상사법학회
- 손영화, "일본법상 내부통제의 개시에 관한 고찰", 법학연구, 18(3), pp.1~49 (2010), 법학연구소
- 양만식, "이사의 내부통제시스템의 구축책임과 현상에 관한 연구", 기업법연구, 25(1), pp.249~272 (2011), 한국기업법학회
- 정대, "日本의 株式會社의 內部統制시스템에 관한 法的考察", 동북아법연구, 3(1), pp.139~180 (2009), 동북아법연구소
- 江頭憲治郎, "株式会社法" (2011), 有斐閣
- 江頭憲治郎, "株式会社法大系" (2013), 有斐閣
- 日野正晴, "詳解)金融商品取引法" (2011), 中央経済社
- 神田秀樹, "会社法" (2012), 弘文堂
- 小林秀之, "内部統制と取締役の責任" (2007), 学陽書房
- 小林秀之=高橋 均, "会社役員の法的責任とコーポレートㆍガバナンス" (2010), 同文舘出版
- 根田正樹=菅原貴与志=松嶋隆弘, "内部統制の理論と実践" (2007), 財経詳報社
- 鈴木克昌, "会社法ㆍ金商法下の内部統制と開示" (2007), 商事法務
- 鳥羽至英, "内部統制の理論と制度" (2007), 国元書房
- 中村直人, "判例に見る会社法の内部統制の水準" (2011), 商事法務
- 八田進二=町田祥弘, "内部統制基準を考える" (2007), 同文舘出版
- 町田祥弘, "内部統制の法的責任に関する研究" (2013), 日本公認会計士協会出版局
- 水野隆徳, "ニューヨーク発 大和銀行事件" (1996), ダイヤモンド社
- あずさ監査法人, "内部統制の実践的マネジメント" (2009), 東洋経済新報社
- 總合ディスクロージャー硏究所, "內部統制制度の運用と課題" (2009), 中央經濟社
- 岩崎惠一, "株式会社の従業員による架空売上げ計上に基づく有価証券報告書虚偽記載と会社代表者の責任(日本システム技術事件)", 龍谷法学, 43(2) (2010), 龍谷大学
- 岩原紳作, "大和銀行代表訴訟事件 － 審判決と代表訴訟制度改正問題(上)", 商事法務, (1576) (2000), 商事法務
- 岩原紳作, "大和銀行代表訴訟事件 － 審判決と代表訴訟制度改正問題(下)", 商事法務, (1577) (2000), 商事法務
- 上村達男, "取締役が対会社責任を負う場合における損害賠償の範囲", 商事法務, (1600) (2001), 商事法務
- 王子田誠, "会社代表者のリスク管理体制構築義務と有価証券報告書の不実記載による会社の責任-日本システム技術事件上告審判決", 金融ㆍ商事判例, (1353) (2010), 経済法令研究会
- 加藤亮太郞, "大和銀行ニューヨーク支店損失事件株主代表訴訟第一審判決-内部統制と取締役の責任について", 彦根論叢, (331) (2001), 滋賀大学
- 仮屋広郷, "リスク管理と取締役の責任", 一橋法学, 12(2) (2013), 一橋大学大学
- 川崎友巳, "アメリカ金融犯罪の一断面－ ｢大和銀行ＮＹ支店事件｣ からの教訓", 商事法務, (1602) (2001)
- 川村正幸, "大和銀行ニユーヨーク支店損失事件株主代表訴訟第ー審判決", 金融ㆍ商事判例, (1107) (2001), 経済法令研究会
- 神崎克郎, "会社の法令遵守と取締役の責任", 法曹時報, 34(4) (1982)
- 神田秀樹, "新会社法と内部統制のあり方", 商事法務, (1766) (2006), 商事法務
- 菊地 仲, "大和銀行株主代表訴訟判決に触れて", 月刊監査役, (436) (2000), 日本監査役協会
- 高橋均, "取締役の善管注意義務および責任に対する割合的因果関係理論の適用の是非", 金融ㆍ商事判例, (1235) (2006), 経済法令研究会
- 北沢義博, "内部統制システム構築の法的義務と役員の責任", 大宮ローレビュー, (2) (2006), 大宮大学
- 小林一于, "親子会社関係における株主代表訴訟の原告適格", 山口經濟學雜誌, 50(6) (2002), 山口大学
- 小林 量, "ダスキン株主代表訴訟判決", 私法判例リマークス, (32) (2006)
- 新谷勝, "持株会社の創設と株主代表訴訟の原告適格", 判例タイムズ, (1085) (2002), 判例タイムヌ社
- 鈴木正彦, "会社の内部統制システムの整備と取締役の責任", 修道法学, 32(2) (2010), 広島修道大学
- 髙島志郎, "日本システム技術事件最高裁判決の検討", 商事法務, (1876) (2009), 商事法務
- 武井一浩, "内部統制法制の実務的観点からの検討", 商事法務, 5(1766) (2006), 商事法務
- 出口正義, "脅迫に応じた取締役の行為と善管注意義務ㆍ忠実義務違反の存否等 － 蛇の目ミシン株主代表訴訟第1審判決", ジュリスト, (1262) (2004), 有斐閣
- 永石一郎, "内部統制システム構築義務とその主張ㆍ立証責任の構造", 一橋法学, 3(2) (2004), 一橋大学
- 中村直人, "大和銀行事件判決と代表訴訟制度の在り方", ジュリスト, (1191) (2000), 有斐閣
- 野村修也, "金融機関に求められるコンプライアンス体制", 商事法務, (1527) (1999), 商事法務
- 野村修也, "取締役の監督義務と内部統制体制", 別冊ジュリスト, (180) (2006), 有斐閣
- 潘 阿憲, "部下の違法行為に対する担当取締役の責任が否定された事例――雪印食品株主代表訴訟事件-東京地判平成17ㆍ2ㆍ10", ジュリスト, (1350) (2008), 有斐閣
- 藤本幸広, "大和銀行事件判決が問いかけるもの一株主代表訴訟制度の見直しをめぐる最近の動向", 経理情報, (949) (2001), 中央經濟社
- 松井秀征, "ダスキン株主代表訴訟事件の検討(上)", 商事法務, (1834) (2008), 商事法務
- 松井秀征, "ダスキン株主代表訴訟事件の検討(下)", 商事法務, (1835) (2008), 商事法務
- 松井秀征, "ダスキン株主代表訴訟事件の検討(中)", 商事法務, (1836) (2008), 商事法務
- 松本伸也, "内部統制システムは何のためにあるのか", NBL, (971) (2012)
- 松本伸也, "取締役の監視義務 (上)", 商事法務, (1971) (2012)
- 松本伸也, "取締役の監視義務 (下)", 商事法務, (1972) (2012), 商事法務
- 南 健悟, "企業不祥事と取締役の民事責任 (一) - 法令遵守体制構築義務を中心に", 北大法学論集, 61(3) (2010), 北海道大学
- 宮廻美明, "内部統制をめぐる最近の動きと企業の課題", 商事法務, (1766) (2006), 商事法務
- 弥永真生, "監査制度の課題", 商事法務, (1974) (2012), 商事法務
- 弥永真生, "有価証券報告書の虚偽記載と内部統制システム構築責任 - 最判平成21ㆍ7ㆍ9", ジュリスト, (1385) (2009), 有斐閣
- コンプライアンス研究会, "内部統制の本質と法的責任-内部統制新時代における役員の責務" (2009), 経済産業調査会