이사 감시의무⋅감독의무의 범위와 이행 -대상판결: 2008.9.11. 선고 2006다68636 판결-
The Scope and Performance of Director's Duty of Oversight and Control - Supreme Court Decision 2006Da68636 Delivered on September 11, 2008 -
0
조회
0
다운로드
11
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In this case the plaintiff purchased the bonds of D corporation, relying on the credit assessment about D corporation. which had been influenced by the window dressing settlement made by management. After D corporation was dishonored, the plaintiff sued president, executive directors and audit of D corporation for they breached the duty of director's oversight to other management and employees. The Supreme Court ruled that the director's duty of oversight might vary with the corporate scale, organization, type of business, regulation, business conditions and financial standing, and that in a highly divided and specialized corporation every director has the duty to build the system of rational information and report system and internal control system, and to see that it operate well. The decision is new one, the supreme Court presents new standard of judgement about the breach of oversight duty. Until this time the breach of oversight duty has been recognized when director take no action even he(or she) knows the fact of unlawful business management or there was a situation in such doubt. Through the new decision the standard of judgement has been changed to whether or not there be effort to build internal system etc. to prevent unlawful business management in a large corporation. To the decision some questions may be raised. First, non-executive director has the duty of building the systems, but he(or she) has no duty to see that they operate well, because he(or she) has difficulty in grasping concrete business management. Second, the Court dealt the issue of director's duty of oversight, however, there is also the issue of duty of controling management. I think a representative director has the oversight duty to the other representative director, but he(or she) has the control duty to the other executive director or employees who have lower post in work. In finding the breach of control duty it should be considered whether there would be the breach of Commercial Law, article of incorporated, and corporate rules and regulations.
Abstract
In this case the plaintiff purchased the bonds of D corporation, relying on the credit assessment about D corporation. which had been influenced by the window dressing settlement made by management. After D corporation was dishonored, the plaintiff sued president, executive directors and audit of D corporation for they breached the duty of director's oversight to other management and employees. The Supreme Court ruled that the director's duty of oversight might vary with the corporate scale, organization, type of business, regulation, business conditions and financial standing, and that in a highly divided and specialized corporation every director has the duty to build the system of rational information and report system and internal control system, and to see that it operate well. The decision is new one, the supreme Court presents new standard of judgement about the breach of oversight duty. Until this time the breach of oversight duty has been recognized when director take no action even he(or she) knows the fact of unlawful business management or there was a situation in such doubt. Through the new decision the standard of judgement has been changed to whether or not there be effort to build internal system etc. to prevent unlawful business management in a large corporation. To the decision some questions may be raised. First, non-executive director has the duty of building the systems, but he(or she) has no duty to see that they operate well, because he(or she) has difficulty in grasping concrete business management. Second, the Court dealt the issue of director's duty of oversight, however, there is also the issue of duty of controling management. I think a representative director has the oversight duty to the other representative director, but he(or she) has the control duty to the other executive director or employees who have lower post in work. In finding the breach of control duty it should be considered whether there would be the breach of Commercial Law, article of incorporated, and corporate rules and regulations.
참고문헌 (16)
- 권기범, "현대회사법론" (2009)
- 김정호, "회사법" (2010)
- 이철송, "회사법강의" (2010)
- 정찬형, "회사법강의(제3판)" (2003), 박영사
- 정찬형, "회사법강의(제3판)" (2003), 박영사
- 정찬형, "상법강의" (2011)
- 최기원, "신회사법론" (2005)
- 김건식, , pp.88~ (2007)
- 김정호, "미국 회사법상 이사의 감시의무 - 대관 2008. 9. 11. 2006 다 68636의 평석을 겸하여 -", 경영법률, 20(1), pp.273~309 (2009), 한국경영법률학회
- 김태진, "이사의 감시의무에 대한 판례의 고찰", 상사법연구, 29(1), pp.109~165 (2010), 한국상사법학회
- 곽관훈, "기업규제의 패러다임전환과 내부통제시스템", 경제법연구, 8(1), pp.27~51 (2009), 한국경제법학회
- 서성호, "日本會社法上 內部統制시스템구축관련 論議에 대한 考察", 기업법연구, 24(2), pp.173~195 (2010), 한국기업법학회
- 서완석, "명목상 이사의 책임", 기업법연구, 23(2), pp.9~37 (2009), 한국기업법학회
- 안수현, "내부통제의 회사법제 정비를 위한 검토", 상사판례연구, 20(2), pp.27~78 (2007), 한국상사판례학회
- 최동렬, "이사의 감시의무위반으로 인한 상법 제401조에 의한 책임 및 감사의 상법 제414조에 의한 책임의 인정기준", 대법원판례해설, (77), pp.138~ (2008)
- 국세청, "8-1-3 법인세신고현황 Ⅲ", 2010년 국세통계연보 (2010)
