주주권 행사에 관한 이익공여와 주주총회 결의의 효력 - 대법원 2014. 7. 11. 자 2013마2397 결정 -
Prohibition against Granting Pecuniary Benefit and Revocation of shareholders' meeting's Resolution
0
조회
0
다운로드
8
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Shareholders have various rights to protect shareholders' investment position. They elect directors periodically, vote on fundamental corporate transactions, and may litigate actions to supervise the management. Shareholders may exercise their rights to protect their interests. But it is not desirable that shareholders exercise their right to make unfair profits or under undue influence. Section 467-2 of Commercial Code provides that a company may not grant to any person a pecuniary benefit in connection with the exercise of rights as a shareholder. If a company has granted any pecuniary benefit in contravention of the provision, the person who has received such benefit shall return it to the company. There is little case about prohibition against granting of pecuniary benefit. Recently, the Supreme Court has made a decision as follows : it is against the articles of incorporation for a company to extend the prevoting period; it is against the provision of prohibition against granting of pecuniary benefit for a company to grant a gift certificate to shareholders attending to prevoting; shareholders' meeting's resolution influenced by granting of pecuniary benefit may be revoked on grounds that the manner of a resolution are in violation of the Code. This paper aims to review and analyses the case which are significant for the interpretation of the above provision.
Abstract
Shareholders have various rights to protect shareholders' investment position. They elect directors periodically, vote on fundamental corporate transactions, and may litigate actions to supervise the management. Shareholders may exercise their rights to protect their interests. But it is not desirable that shareholders exercise their right to make unfair profits or under undue influence. Section 467-2 of Commercial Code provides that a company may not grant to any person a pecuniary benefit in connection with the exercise of rights as a shareholder. If a company has granted any pecuniary benefit in contravention of the provision, the person who has received such benefit shall return it to the company. There is little case about prohibition against granting of pecuniary benefit. Recently, the Supreme Court has made a decision as follows : it is against the articles of incorporation for a company to extend the prevoting period; it is against the provision of prohibition against granting of pecuniary benefit for a company to grant a gift certificate to shareholders attending to prevoting; shareholders' meeting's resolution influenced by granting of pecuniary benefit may be revoked on grounds that the manner of a resolution are in violation of the Code. This paper aims to review and analyses the case which are significant for the interpretation of the above provision.
참고문헌 (33)
- 강위두, "상법강의(상)" (2009), 형설출판사
- 권기범, "현대회사법론" (2014), 삼영사
- 이철송, "회사법강의" (2015), 박영사
- 임재연, "회사법Ⅰ" (2013), 박영사
- 정동윤, "상법(상)" (2012), 법문사
- 정찬형, "상법강의(상)" (2015), 박영사
- 최기원, "신회사법론" (2009), 박영사
- 최준선, "회사법 제9판" (2014), 삼영사
- 한국상사법학회, "주식회사법대계 Ⅱ, Ⅲ" (2013), 법문사
- 김선정, "주주의 권리행사에 관한 이익공여의 금지-소위 총회꾼의 횡포에 대한 법적 대응-", 개발논총, 2 (1992), 동국대학교 지역개발대학원
- 김성탁, "사례 주식회사법" (2006), 영남대학교 출판부
- 김택주, "2014년 회사법 판례의 경향과 주요쟁점", 상사판례연구, 28(1), pp.189~253 (2015), 한국상사판례학회
- 권재열, "상법상 이익공여죄에 관한 소고", 법학연구, 18(3), pp.127~149 (2008), 법학연구원
- 노혁준, "2014년 회사법 중요 판례", 인권과 정의, (448), pp.146~159 (2015), 대한변호사협회
- 안강현, "Vote-buying", 법조, 54(5), pp.63~90 (2005), 법조협회
- 우홍구, "주주의 권리행사와 관련한 이익공여의 금지", 법대논총, 3 (1994), 건국대학교
- 유영일, "주주총회결의취소의 소와 법원의 재량기각 - 재량기각요건에 관한 우리와 일본판례의 비교를 중심으로 -", 상사판례연구, (16), pp.133~168 (2004), 한국상사판례학회
- 양만식, "위임장권유와 주주총회결의의 취소", 기업법연구, 23(3), pp.159~190 (2009), 한국기업법학회
- 이효경, "이익공여금지규정을 둘러싼 제 문제－ 최근 일본에서의 논의를 중심으로 －", 경영법률, 24(1), pp.1~28 (2013), 한국경영법률학회
- 정쾌영, "株主平等의 原則에 대한 再考", 상사판례연구, 23(4), pp.135~162 (2010), 한국상사판례학회
- 江頭憲治郞, "株式會社法" (2011), 有斐閣
- 近藤光男, "最新株式會社法" (2009), 中央經濟社
- 上柳克郞, "新版 注釋會社法(9)" (1999), 有斐閣
- 前田庸, "會社法入門" (2009), 有斐閣
- 久保田安彦, "｢株主權行使に關する利益供與｣に關する規律(會社法からの分析)", 法律時報, 84(11) (2012)
- 菊地雄介, "會社法判例百選" (2011), 有斐閣
- 根本伸一, "利益供與の禁止規定の可能性", 法律論叢, 83(6) (2011)
- 市川兼三, "利益供與要求罪の新設と利益供與禁止規定の立法趣旨", 香川法學, 18(2) (1998)
- 酒卷俊雄, "會社法重要判例解說" (2009), 成文堂
- 酒井太郞, "會社法·金融法の新展開" (2009), 中央經濟社
- 中村直人, "モリテックス事件判決と實務對應-東京地裁平成19年12月6日判決の檢討", 商事法務 No.1823, ~ (2008)
- 川島いづみ, "利益供與と株主總會の決議瑕疵", 法律時報, 80(11) (2008)
- 村田敏一, "株主の權利行使の關する利益供與について-民事責任と刑事責任-", 立命館法學, 345·346 (2012)