한국과 중국의 회계기준 차이에 관한 비교 연구 - 재무상태표 자산항목을 중심으로 -

Abstract

A large number of countries around the world are introducing the international financial reporting standards for the purpose of transparency of finance, improvement of foreign confidence, cost saving, etc., which is becoming a worldwide trend. However, some countries totally adopt the international financial reporting standards without correction and other countries are adopting gradually considering various situations of own countries. Even though the big frame of the financial reporting standards is same, it is different in specific contents. Therefore, it became an important study field in international finance to compare and analyze the differences of financial reporting standards among these countries. Numerous studies on comparison and analysis of financial reporting standards between Korea and China have been performed but in both countries, financial reporting standards have been corrected continually until now so that there are some unrealistic parts in existing comparison studies. Therefore, it is necessary to compare and analyze newly financial standards based upon latest contents. In this study, this writer has compared and analyzed financial reporting standards between both countries focused on items with big difference in the asset items of the statement of financial position and main study results are shown as followings. First, as the international financial reporting standards was interpreted without correction as they are and wholly adopted in Korea as they are, there is little difference on contents and form in the international financial reporting standards. However, in China the government aims at introducing wholly the international financial reporting standards but there still exist great deal of difference in specific contents. Second, in Korea, fair value assessment is preferred in follow-up assessment of assets and it is a rule to select either fair value or cost and to measure but in China, it is a fundamental rule to assess by cost. Third, in Korea, the scope of intangible assets is described in detailed classifications such as marketing, clients, arts, agreement and intangible assets based on technology, etc. but in China, the scope of intangible assets is limited in several items such as patent, etc. and client relation, etc. are not considered to be intangible assets. Fourth, in Korea, intangible assets are included in the objects of capitalization of borrowing cost but in China, there is no definite regulation so complementary measures are necessary. Fifth, in Korea, if enterprises have some conditions in assets except goodwill, reversal of impairment loss is permitted but in China, impairment loss isn't reversed.