은행업무 범위에 관한 법적 연구 － 부수업무를 중심으로 －

Abstract

One of the core issues of enhancing competitiveness of financial institutions is the expansion of the scope of their business. So, the issue of banking business is dealt with as one of the main subjects in the Bank Act in Korea. Under the current Bank Act and the regulations thereof, banking organizations are permitted to engage in core business such as deposit-taking and lending, concurrent business such as trust business and credit card business, and ancillary business such as payment guarantee business and financial derivative transaction business. The details of the scope of banks’ ancillary business are described in the Guideline of the Scope of Banks’ Ancillary Business (the “Guideline”) proclaimed by the Ministry of Finance and Economy (the “MOFE”). This article is intended to suggest some improvement measures for banks’ ancillary business based on the review of the current ancillary business regulations. First, the current type of ancillary business needs to be divided into the business incidental to a bank’s core business and the business derived from using personnel, assets and facilities owned by a bank. Second, part of the current ancillary businesses needs to be recategorized into its concurrent business (e.g., securities business such as securities underwriting and dealing, RP, and insurance agent business). Third, the current ancillary business needs to be in more detail prescribed in the Guideline because there still exist unclear provisions in the current Guideline. Most importantly, the negative system in defining the scope of ancillary business should be introduced. Fourth, to enhance the competitiveness of banking institutions, the scope of banking business needs to be expanded, and in that respect, securities business such as underwriting of corporate bonds, dealing of stocks, and brokerage of bonds and stocks needs to be permitted. Finally, the power of decision-making of the scope of ancillary business should be transferred from the current MOFE to the financial supervisory authorities which have more access to market information.