본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

현물배당제도에 관한 쟁점사항의 검토

A Review on Legal Issues of Dividends-in-kind under the current Commercial Code of Korea amended in 2011

이영철
한국상사법학회|2014.11|상사법연구 (KOREAN COMMERCIAL LAW ASSOCIATION)|제33권 제3호|pp. 197-228

0

조회

0

다운로드

3

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

인적분할현물배당자기주식treasury stockspin-off이익배당배당가능이익dividends주식배당금전배당profit available for dividendcash dividendsdividends-in-kind/property dividendsshare dividends
주제분류법학

초록

Dividends-in-kind was introduced in amendments of the Commercial Code of Korea in 2011. The introduction of dividends-in-kind was in order to satisfy needs of business for diversification of dividends and shareholders’ expectation for dividends. Along with the introduction of dividends-in-kind, whether the right to ask for cash dividends is automatically granted to shareholders in case where paying dividends-in-kind is resolved by a general meeting of shareholders or by a board of directors under the current commercial Code of Korea or not is being disputed, and the pros and cons of validity of the Article 462-4 in the Commercial Code are divided. It is problematic that there are no regulations applied as the standards of valuating properties and for the treatments of dividends-in-kind illegally paid to shareholders, so dividends- in-kind is not used actually in the world of business. The purpose of this study is to review legal issues mentioned above around dividends-in-kind. The first subject is on whether the right to ask for cash dividends is automatically granted to shareholders in case where paying dividends-in-kind is resolved by a general meeting of shareholders or by a board of directors, and on the pros and cons of validity of the Article 462-4 in the Commercial Code. The right for shareholders to ask for cash dividends shall be provided in the regulations related to dividends-in-kind, and the Article 462-4 in the Commercial Code is valid, therefore the board of directors is able to make a decision for dividends-in-kind. The second issue is on whether treasury stock is able to be paid as the object of dividends-in-kind to shareholders, and on which criteria shall be applied to valuate properties. The treasury stock is not able to be paid as the object of dividends-in-kind. The properties paid as the object of dividends-in-kind shall be valuated by market price. When considering no regulations applied for the treatments of dividends- in-kind illegally paid to shareholders, it is necessary to introduce newly a provision in terms of the treatments of dividends-in-kind illegally paid to shareholders into the Commercial Code. The last theme is on rebuilding or restructuring companies by dividends- in-kind or by spin-off. The two systems are separately operated because of differences in procedures and liabilities between two systems. Dividends-in-kind should be operated to keep a balance between principle of private autonomy and protection of shareholders' interests.

Abstract

Dividends-in-kind was introduced in amendments of the Commercial Code of Korea in 2011. The introduction of dividends-in-kind was in order to satisfy needs of business for diversification of dividends and shareholders’ expectation for dividends. Along with the introduction of dividends-in-kind, whether the right to ask for cash dividends is automatically granted to shareholders in case where paying dividends-in-kind is resolved by a general meeting of shareholders or by a board of directors under the current commercial Code of Korea or not is being disputed, and the pros and cons of validity of the Article 462-4 in the Commercial Code are divided. It is problematic that there are no regulations applied as the standards of valuating properties and for the treatments of dividends-in-kind illegally paid to shareholders, so dividends- in-kind is not used actually in the world of business. The purpose of this study is to review legal issues mentioned above around dividends-in-kind. The first subject is on whether the right to ask for cash dividends is automatically granted to shareholders in case where paying dividends-in-kind is resolved by a general meeting of shareholders or by a board of directors, and on the pros and cons of validity of the Article 462-4 in the Commercial Code. The right for shareholders to ask for cash dividends shall be provided in the regulations related to dividends-in-kind, and the Article 462-4 in the Commercial Code is valid, therefore the board of directors is able to make a decision for dividends-in-kind. The second issue is on whether treasury stock is able to be paid as the object of dividends-in-kind to shareholders, and on which criteria shall be applied to valuate properties. The treasury stock is not able to be paid as the object of dividends-in-kind. The properties paid as the object of dividends-in-kind shall be valuated by market price. When considering no regulations applied for the treatments of dividends- in-kind illegally paid to shareholders, it is necessary to introduce newly a provision in terms of the treatments of dividends-in-kind illegally paid to shareholders into the Commercial Code. The last theme is on rebuilding or restructuring companies by dividends- in-kind or by spin-off. The two systems are separately operated because of differences in procedures and liabilities between two systems. Dividends-in-kind should be operated to keep a balance between principle of private autonomy and protection of shareholders' interests.

참고문헌 (55)

  1. 권기범, "현대회사법론" (2014), 삼영사
  2. 김정호, "회사법" (2014), 法文社
  3. 법무부, "상법 회사편 해설" (2012), 도서출판 동강
  4. 송옥렬, "상법강의 제4판" (2014), 홍문사
  5. 이철송, "2011 개정상법 축조해설" (2011), 박영사
  6. 이철송, "회사법강의" (2014), 박영사
  7. 임재연, "회사법Ⅰ" (2013), 박영사
  8. 정찬형, "상법강의(상)" (2014), 박영사
  9. 주식회사 자본제도 개선방안 연구, "최준선", 한국상장회사협의회, ~ (2006)
  10. 최준선, "개정상법 회사편 해설" (2011), 한국상장회사협의회
  11. 최준선, "회사법 제9판" (2014), 삼영사
  12. 강경진, "개정상법상 배당가능이익 계산에 관한 소고", 선진상사법률연구, (62), pp.222~249 (2013), 법무부
  13. 곽관훈, "현물배당의 활용 가능성 및 한계와 개선방안", 상사법연구, 33(1), pp.103~133 (2014), 한국상사법학회
  14. 김순석, "이익배당의 결정과 기준일제도의 개선방안", 증권법연구, 14(2), pp.47~88 (2013), 한국증권법학회
  15. 김의석, "자기주식 거래의 과세", 법학연구, 15(2), pp.387~417 (2012), 법학연구소[DOI]
  16. 김 춘, "주식회사의 이익분배에 관한 법적 연구", 박사, 법학과 상사법전공, pp.2013
  17. 김태진, "미국 법제하에서의 적대적 M&A 방어방법의 한국 법제하에서의 활용가능성", 증권법연구, 8(2), pp.309~341 (2007), 한국증권법학회
  18. 김홍기, "2011년 개정상법 및 동법시행령상 회사재무분야의 주요쟁점과 해석 및 운용상의 과제", 기업법연구, 26(1), pp.107~146 (2012), 한국기업법학회
  19. 문준우, "한국 회사법상 재무규정의 동향", 법학논총, 20(3), pp.107~145 (2013), 법학연구원
  20. 문호준, "개정상법상 합병대가의 유연화와 현물배당", BFL, (51) (2012), 서울대 금융법센터
  21. 박종복, "配當財源規制에 대한 法的 考察", 외법논집, (32), pp.423~450 (2008), 법학연구소
  22. 손진화, "개정회사법(2011년)의 체계와 논점", 경영법률, 21(4), pp.167~214 (2011), 한국경영법률학회
  23. 송옥렬, "2011년 개정 회사법의 해석상 주요쟁점 - 기업재무 분야를 중심으로 -", 저스티스, (127), pp.45~79 (2011), 한국법학원
  24. 송옥렬, "기업분할형 구조조정과 채권자보호의 정합성", 기업법연구, 26(2), pp.53~73 (2012), 한국기업법학회[DOI]
  25. 송종준, "주식회사 회계규정의 개정과 과제", 기업법연구, 20(4), pp.71~92 (2006), 한국기업법학회
  26. 신기선, "개정상법과 세무문제―주식 및 배당제도를 중심으로―", 조세법연구, 18(1), pp.358~396 (2012), 한국세법학회[DOI]
  27. 안수현, "상법개정안의 배당제도 및 실무상의 문제", BFL, (20) (2006), 서울대 금융법센터
  28. 이영철, "개정상법상 상환주식의 해석상 쟁점에 관한 고찰", 선진상사법률연구, (66), pp.1~36 (2014), 법무부
  29. 이영철, "자기주식의 취득 및 처분과 관련된 몇 가지 쟁점", 기업법연구, 28(3), pp.99~139 (2014), 한국기업법학회
  30. 이철송, "2011년 개정상법의 개요 및 세제상의 유의점", 계간 세무사, 통권 : 129 (2011), 한국세무사회
  31. 임정하, "현물배당과 교부금합병을 통한 기업구조조정에 대한 소고", 법학연구, (48), pp.377~403 (2012), 한국법학회
  32. ’ 판례와 현물배당의 가치기준에 관한 고찰, "상사판례연구", 2013, 299~327, pp.한국상사판례학회
  33. 정준우, "개정상법상 자기주식의 재무관리에 관한 쟁점사항 검토", 법학연구, 15(3), pp.651~685 (2012), 법학연구소
  34. 정준혁, "주식회사법대계 Ⅲ" (2012), 법문사
  35. 최준선, "개정상법상 자기주식의 취득과 처분", 상사법연구, 31(2), pp.219~241 (2012), 한국상사법학회
  36. 황현영, "개정상법상 자기주식 관련 해석상ㆍ실무상 쟁점 검토", 선진상사법률연구, (60), pp.173~200 (2012), 법무부
  37. Alan Dignam, "Company Law" (2010), Oxford University Press
  38. "Companies Act 2006, Explanation Notes"[URL]
  39. James D. Cox, "Cox & Hazen on Corporations, vol. 3" (2003), Wolters Kluwer Law & Business
  40. Patrick A. Gaughan, "Mergers, Acquisitions and Corporate Restructuring" (2002), John Wiley & Sons, Inc
  41. Robert W. Hamilton, "The Law of Corporations in a Nutshell" (1996), West Publishing Co
  42. Sidney I. Simon, "spin-offs vs. dividends in kind", The Accounting Review, 35(1) (1960), American Accounting Association
  44. 江頭憲治郞, "株式會社法" (2011), 有斐閣
  45. 神田秀樹, "會社法" (2013), 弘文堂
  46. 彌永眞生, "會社法の實踐トピックス24" (2009), 日本評論社
  47. 相澤哲, "立案擔當者による新·會社法の解說", 商事法務, (295) (2006), 商事法務硏究會
  48. 田中亘, "事例で考える会社法" (2011), 有斐閣
  49. 吉本健一, "會社法における財源規制違反の剰余金の配當等の效力", 阪大法學, 57(5) (2008), 大阪大学法学会
  50. 南保勝美, "會社分割制度の解釋上の問題點について", 法律論叢, 79(4·5合倂) (2007), 明治大学 法律研究所
  51. 小林量, "檢證會社法(浜田道代先生還曆記念)" (2007), 信山社
  52. 松井英樹, "違法な剰余金配當の效力について", 白山法學, (10) (2014), 東洋大学
  53. 勝間田学, "現物配當 実施上の法務ポイント", 経理情報, (1270) (2011), 中央経済社
  54. 葉玉匡美, "財源規制違反行爲の效力", 商事法務, (1772) (2006), 商事法務硏究會
  55. 村田敏一, "財源規制に違反した株式会社の剰余金配當等の規整に関する幾つかの問題(１)", 立命館法學, (333·334) (2010), 立命館大学

관련 논문AI추천

현물배당의 활용 가능성 및 한계와 개선방안곽관훈한국상사법학회 · 상사법연구2014 · 제33권 제1호무액면주식의 도입 관련 회사법상 쟁점 연구양기진법학연구소 · 일감법학2012 · 제22호2011년 개정 상법이 배당 실무에 미친 영향정준혁한국상사법학회 · 상사법연구2018 · 제37권 제2호配當財源規制에 대한 法的 考察박종복법학연구소 · 외법논집2008 · 제32호자기주식취득의 허용에 따른 법적 쟁점안성포한국상사법학회 · 상사법연구2011 · 제30권 제2호현물배당과 주주평등원칙 - 독일 회사법상의 논의를 소재로 -황남석한국상사법학회 · 상사법연구2023 · 제41권 제4호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (8건)

監事는 會計監査를 하지 않는다 - 상법 회계관련 규정의 규범성에 대한 斷想 -오수근pp. 9-41주식회사의 배당가능이익 계산과 미실현이익심영pp. 43-71외부감사인의 비례책임제도이준섭pp. 73-106營業讓渡人의 營業上 債權者에 대한 營業讓渡人과 營業讓受人의 辨濟責任 負擔의 法律關係김성탁pp. 107-155일본 회사법상 거부권부종류주식에 관한 고찰오성근pp. 157-195
원문 보기