이사의 충실의무(상법 제382조의 3)의 재검토 - 2009년 신탁법 개정안과 관련하여 -
A Reexamination of the Director's Duty of Loyalty(Art.382-3 of Korean Commercial Law)
0
조회
0
다운로드
14
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Scholars' opinion has been divided on the issue of the relationship between director's duty of care and duty of loyalty in Korean Commercial Law. Case Law interprets that the duty of loyalty is included in the meaning of duty of care, and Art.382-3 of Commercial Law has no special meaning. Recently the Trust Law Amendment of 2009 clearly enacts the trustee' duty of loyalty that has been admitted only by interpretation. And the Commercial Law Amendment of 2008 tightens up the director's duty of loyalty; to expand the scope of self-dealing that requires the approval of the board of directors, and to introduce the new provision of corporate's business opportunity doctrine. In this circumstances, the writer's opinion is that the director's duty of loyalty should be estimated positively. And in this regard, the writer concentrates on considering why it should be. The concept of duty of loyalty is helpful, both in systematizing the director's various duties and in adjusting the various interests of stakeholders in stock corporations. So the writer's opinion is: There exists a fiduciary relationship between director and the stock corporation same as between trustee and truster, and fiduciary duty which is composed of duty of care and duty of loyalty comes from this relationship. And Art.382② of Commercial Law enacts the provision of director's duty of care, and Art.382-3 thereof enacts the provision of director's duty of loyalty. This paper consists of as follows:Ⅰ. Introduction Ⅱ. Traditional Theory and Case Law on the Meaning of Art.382-3 of Commercial Law Ⅲ. Terminology Ⅳ. Trustee's Duty of Loyalty in the Trust Law Amendment of 2009Ⅴ. Importance of Art.382-3 of Commercial Law Ⅵ. Conclusion
Abstract
Scholars' opinion has been divided on the issue of the relationship between director's duty of care and duty of loyalty in Korean Commercial Law. Case Law interprets that the duty of loyalty is included in the meaning of duty of care, and Art.382-3 of Commercial Law has no special meaning. Recently the Trust Law Amendment of 2009 clearly enacts the trustee' duty of loyalty that has been admitted only by interpretation. And the Commercial Law Amendment of 2008 tightens up the director's duty of loyalty; to expand the scope of self-dealing that requires the approval of the board of directors, and to introduce the new provision of corporate's business opportunity doctrine. In this circumstances, the writer's opinion is that the director's duty of loyalty should be estimated positively. And in this regard, the writer concentrates on considering why it should be. The concept of duty of loyalty is helpful, both in systematizing the director's various duties and in adjusting the various interests of stakeholders in stock corporations. So the writer's opinion is: There exists a fiduciary relationship between director and the stock corporation same as between trustee and truster, and fiduciary duty which is composed of duty of care and duty of loyalty comes from this relationship. And Art.382② of Commercial Law enacts the provision of director's duty of care, and Art.382-3 thereof enacts the provision of director's duty of loyalty. This paper consists of as follows:Ⅰ. Introduction Ⅱ. Traditional Theory and Case Law on the Meaning of Art.382-3 of Commercial Law Ⅲ. Terminology Ⅳ. Trustee's Duty of Loyalty in the Trust Law Amendment of 2009Ⅴ. Importance of Art.382-3 of Commercial Law Ⅵ. Conclusion
참고문헌 (29)
- 박길준, "개정상법축조해설" (1999), 박영사
- 신탁법 개정안 해설, "법무부", ~ (2010)
- 이중기, "신탁법" (2007), 삼우사
- 이철송, "「회사법강의」(제16판)" (2009), 박영사
- 정찬형, "「상법강의(상)」 (제12판)" (2009), 박영사
- 최기원, "「신회사법론」(제13대정판)" (2009), 박영사
- 최문희, "이사의 손해배상책임의 제한" (2007), 경인문화사
- 최수정, "일본 신신탁법" (2007), 진원사
- 가정준, "美國法上 理事의 責任과 義務 - Fiduciary Duty를 중심으로 -", 비교사법, 14(1), pp.1~22 (2007), 한국비교사법학회
- 강희갑, "미국법상 이사의 충실의무와 이사의 자기거래", 기업법연구, 5 (2000)
- 권재열, "상법 제382조의 3(이사의 충실의무)의 존재의의 ―대법원 판례의 동향에 대한 검토를 중심으로―", 상사판례연구, 22(1), pp.3~35 (2009), 한국상사판례학회
- 권재열, "회사기회의법리 －2007년 2월 조정된 상법개정안의 비교법적 검토－", 상사법연구, 25(4), pp.71~112 (2007), 한국상사법학회
- 권재열, "상법 개정안상 이사의 의무와 책임규정에 대한 비판적 검토 -2008년 10월 정부가 제출한 의안을 대상으로 하여-", 상사법연구, 28(3), pp.175~206 (2009), 한국상사법학회
- 김건식, "회사법상 충실의무법리의 재검토", 「21세기 한국 상사법학의 과제와 전망」(송상현교수 화갑기념 논문집) (2002), 박영사
- 김병연, "이사의 충실의무와 영미법상 신인의무(Fiduciary duty)", 상사법연구, 24(3), pp.61~82 (2005), 한국상사법학회
- 김병연, "한국 상법상 이사의 의무와 책임추궁", 상사법연구, 28(1), pp.93~130 (2009), 한국상사법학회
- 김재범, "이사 자기거래와 회사기회유용의 제한 - 2008년 상법개정안 검토 -", 법학논고, (29), pp.79~103 (2008), 법학연구원
- 김택주, "경영판단의 원칙의 적용요건", 기업법연구, 20(1), pp.41~70 (2006), 한국기업법학회
- 문정해, "주주행동주의 규제를 위한 충실의무 적용에 관한 연구", 비교사법, 16(1), pp.367~395 (2009), 한국비교사법학회
- 백정웅, "미국의 회사기회유용이론과 우리 상법 ― 델라웨어주의 구스 사건을 중심으로 ―", 상사법연구, 25(3), pp.361~393 (2006), 한국상사법학회
- 안성포, "신탁법상 수탁자의 충실의무에 관한 고찰 - 2009년 법무부 개정안을 중심으로 -", 상사판례연구, 22(4), pp.83~120 (2009), 한국상사판례학회
- 이홍욱, "판례를 통해 본 이사의 충실의무", 비교사법, 12(4), pp.425~451 (2005), 한국비교사법학회
- 임중호, "이사의 충실의무론", 비교사법, 6(2) (1999)
- 전삼현, "이사의 충실의무에 관한 재고찰", 인권과 정의, (268) (1998)
- 江頭憲治郞, "「株式會社法」(제3판)" (2009), 有斐閣
- 森本 滋, "取締役の善管注意義務と忠實義務", 民商法雜誌, 81(4) (1980)
- 神谷高保, "會社債權者に對する取締役の信認義務の理論的構造 - 會社が倒産の危機に瀕した場合の取締役の義務と取締役の第三者に對する責任’との關係についての序論的硏究", 法學志林, 106(3) (2009)
- 赤堀光子, "取締役の忠實義務(一) - (四)", 法學協會雜誌, 85(1) (1968)
- 正木義久, "日美フィデュシャリ-義務の變容と比較 - 昨年のデラウエア州判決にみる新しい考え方と日本の新會社法·信託法 -", 商事法務, (1804) (2007)