상법상 다중대표소송제도의 도입에 관한 고찰
A Study of Multiple Derivative Suit on Commercial Law
0
조회
0
다운로드
20
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Commercial law, which is the most fundamental law that rules (or guarantees) corporate activities should fully consider the views and opinions of companies because they are the subject and user of the law. Laws and regulations do not just regulate corporate activities but also help invigorate economic activities, enhance competitiveness and maximize corporate value. In fact, a parent company and a subsidiary company are two separate legal entities and so it might be against corporate separateness if shareholders from a parent company directly call executives from a subsidiary company account. In addition, a parent company indirectly supervises its subsidiary companies under the current corporate law by executing its voting right at the shareholders' meeting, and calls executives of the subsidiary company account as shareholders depending on cases whenever it needs to do so. From this point of view, it doesn't seem to be quite necessary to protect executives of the subsidiary company by introducing a multiple derivative suit, which has become an issue regarding the transparency of corporate governance. Actually, it is not deniable that skepticism around introducing the multiple derivative suit that might create other problems and could be seen just as a way of strengthening corporate regulation. However, under the current law in which parent-subsidiary relationship is allowed, the business activities of a subsidiary company actually affect the share price of a parent company. In particular, for a case of a pure holding company that does not do any business like production and sale but only supervises subsidiary companies, the business results of the subsidiaries might harm the investment and profits of the shareholders of the parent company. Currently the law does not allow the shareholders of the parent company to control the business activities of the subsidiaries. Given the economic situations in Korea, the necessity for soundly nurturing invigorating companies is needed, and the role of the corporate law is thought to be more important than ever in guaranteeing free management to make it possible to start business based on the rule of articles. It is critical that companies are equipped with corporate governance that helps respond fast to changes to survive global competitions. In fact, many companies doing business home and abroad are on the edge of the economic crisis beginning from the global financial crisis. Many companies are seen to be half of crumbling because of decreased profits due to the easy money policy from different countries. I cautiously argue the necessity of introducing the multiple derivative suit in that companies need to establish sound and transparent corporate governance that helps respond fast to changes caused by financial crisis in order to enhance the global comparativeness and distribute profits fairly to the stakeholders including shareholders.
Abstract
Commercial law, which is the most fundamental law that rules (or guarantees) corporate activities should fully consider the views and opinions of companies because they are the subject and user of the law. Laws and regulations do not just regulate corporate activities but also help invigorate economic activities, enhance competitiveness and maximize corporate value. In fact, a parent company and a subsidiary company are two separate legal entities and so it might be against corporate separateness if shareholders from a parent company directly call executives from a subsidiary company account. In addition, a parent company indirectly supervises its subsidiary companies under the current corporate law by executing its voting right at the shareholders' meeting, and calls executives of the subsidiary company account as shareholders depending on cases whenever it needs to do so. From this point of view, it doesn't seem to be quite necessary to protect executives of the subsidiary company by introducing a multiple derivative suit, which has become an issue regarding the transparency of corporate governance. Actually, it is not deniable that skepticism around introducing the multiple derivative suit that might create other problems and could be seen just as a way of strengthening corporate regulation. However, under the current law in which parent-subsidiary relationship is allowed, the business activities of a subsidiary company actually affect the share price of a parent company. In particular, for a case of a pure holding company that does not do any business like production and sale but only supervises subsidiary companies, the business results of the subsidiaries might harm the investment and profits of the shareholders of the parent company. Currently the law does not allow the shareholders of the parent company to control the business activities of the subsidiaries. Given the economic situations in Korea, the necessity for soundly nurturing invigorating companies is needed, and the role of the corporate law is thought to be more important than ever in guaranteeing free management to make it possible to start business based on the rule of articles. It is critical that companies are equipped with corporate governance that helps respond fast to changes to survive global competitions. In fact, many companies doing business home and abroad are on the edge of the economic crisis beginning from the global financial crisis. Many companies are seen to be half of crumbling because of decreased profits due to the easy money policy from different countries. I cautiously argue the necessity of introducing the multiple derivative suit in that companies need to establish sound and transparent corporate governance that helps respond fast to changes caused by financial crisis in order to enhance the global comparativeness and distribute profits fairly to the stakeholders including shareholders.
참고문헌 (45)
- 이철송, "회사법 강의" (2013), 박영사
- 정찬형, "상법강의(상)(제16판)" (2013), 박영사
- 김대연, "지배·종속회사에서의 대표소송", 상사법연구, 19(2) (2000)
- 김동석, "주주의 대표소송과 중복대표소송", 경영법률, 10 (2000)
- 김재형, "이중대표소송의 인정근거", 상사판례연구, 15 (2003)
- 권재열, "二重代表訴訟의 許否에 대한 比較法的 檢討- 서울고등법원 2003.8.22. 선고, 2002다13746 판결을 대상으로 하여 -", 비교사법, 11(2), pp.443~475 (2004), 한국비교사법학회
- 손영화, "모회사 주주의 대표소송과 이사의 경영판단(대법원 2004. 9. 23. 선고, 2003다49221 사건을 중심으로)", 상사판례연구, (17), pp.3~55 (2004), 한국상사판례학회
- 김대규, "支配會社株主의 二重代表訴訟", 증권법연구, 5(2), pp.121~155 (2004), 한국증권법학회
- 정준우, "주주대표소송의 원고적격에 관한 쟁점사항 검토", 기업법연구, 19(2), pp.129~154 (2005), 한국기업법학회
- 김정호, "이중대표소송에 대한 연구", 경영법률, 17(1), pp.221~290 (2006), 한국경영법률학회
- 전삼현, "이중대표소송제에 관한 소고", 경영법률, 17(1), pp.291~316 (2006), 한국경영법률학회
- 정찬형, "상법(회사법) 개정 공청회", 법무부 공청회자료, ~ (2006)
- 홍복기, "주식회사의 지배구조에 관한 2006년 회사법 개정시안", 상사법연구, 25(2), pp.163~193 (2006), 한국상사법학회
- 이중대표소송제도 도입의 문제점, "박신호", 전국경제인연합회, ~, pp.CEO REPORT CER 006-12
- 유진희, "이중대표소송의 도입에 관한 입법론적 고찰", 상사판례연구, 19(4), pp.121~153 (2006), 한국상사판례학회
- 최완진, "二重代表訴訟制度에 관한 法的 考察", 경영법률, 18(2), pp.255~274 (2008), 한국경영법률학회
- 김재범, "이중대표소송제도의 도입 -상법에 대한 정합성 여부-", 상사법연구, 25(4), pp.27~57 (2007), 한국상사법학회
- 공정거래위원회, "2012년 공정거래법상 지주회사 현황분석결과보도자료", ~
- William H. Painter, "Double Derivative Suits and Other Remedies With Regard to Damaged Subsidiaries", Ind. L. J, 36, pp.143~ (1961)
- Harry G. Henn, "Law of Corporations and other Business Enterprises" (1983)
- Daivid W. Locascio, "The Dilemma of the Double Derivative Suit", NW. U. L. Rev, 83 (1989)
- Fhillip. I. Blumbberg, "Blumberg on Corporate Groups §44.02" (2007)
- 春田博, "アメリカにおける重層的代表訴訟の展開, In 長濱洋一教授還暦記念 『現代 英米会社法の諸相』" (1996), 成文堂
- 神作裕之, "純粋株主会社における株主保護(上)", 商事法務, (1429) (1996)
- 柴田和史, "二重代表訴訟, In 竹内昭夫先生追悼論文集, 商事法の展望ー新しい企業法を求めて" (1998), 商事法務研究会
- 畠田公明, "純粋持株会社と株主代表訴訟", ジュリスト, (1140) (1998)
- 伊藤靖史, "子会社の基礎的変更への親会社株主の関与", 同志社法学, 51(2) (1999)
- 山田泰弘, "親子会社·株式交換と多重的代表訴訟(一)", 名古屋大学法政論集, (177) (1999)
- 山田泰弘, "株主代表訴訟の法理" (2000), 信山社
- 経済産業省, "今後の企業法制の在り方について", ~ (2000)
- 前田重行, "持株会社株主総会の子会社に対する権限の拡大と株主総会の運営, In 筑波大学大学院 企業法学専攻十周年記念論集 『現代企業法学の研究』" (2001), 信山社
- 古川朋子, "フランスにおける会社訴権の個人的公使制度の展開ー株主の会社訴権 行使権限を中心としてー", 早稲田法学会誌, 51 (2001)
- 早川勝, "持株会社による事業統合の問題点", 判例タイムズ, (1158) (2004)
- 高橋英治, "ドイツと日本における株式会社法の改革ーコーポレート·ガバナンス と企業結合法制" (2007), 商事法務
- 高橋均, "株主代表訴訟の理論と制度改正の課題" (2008), 同文館出版
- 古川朋雄, "米国における二重代表訴訟制度の日本への導入について", 六甲台論集, 54(3) (2008)
- 清水円香, "フランスの親会社株主保護, In 企業結合法の総合的研究" (2009), 商事法務
- 船津浩司, "ドイツの親会社株主保護, In 企業結合法の総合的研究" (2009), 商事法務
- 船津浩司, "グループ経営の義務と責任" (2010), 商事法務
- 法務省民事局参事官室, "会社法制の見直しに関する中間試案の補足説明", ~ (2011)
- 清水円香, "フランスにおける多重訴訟に関する議論の状況", 商事法務, (1964) (2012)
- 山本憲光, "多重代表訴訟に関する実務上の留意点", 商事法務, (1980) (2012)
- 岩原神, "会社法制の見直しに関する要綱案の解説(Ⅲ)", 商事法務, (1977) (2012)
- 法務省, "會社法制に関する要綱", ~ (2013)
- 日本経済団体連合会, "「会社法制の見直しに関する中間試案」に対する意見", ~ (2012)
