상법상 적대적 M & A 대응방안
A Study on Defensive Legal Systems against hostile M & A
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Lately Mergers and acquisitions are increased in business world of Korea. M&A serve as effective means for growth of companies and for restructuring small, medium and venture businesses to make them more competitive. In order to mature the M&A market offensive tactics with defensive tactics are indispensible to be arranged. These incidents have triggered demand for legislative measures that allow firms to take appropriate actions to shield management rights from hostile M&A and for solution to the problem of domestic companies being discriminated both positively or negatively in foreign M&A. Poison pill is any tactic by a company designed to avoid a hostile takeover. Consequently key countries are working to improve their M&A-related institutions and our country (South Korea) have also abolished regulations that help companies defend themselves against hostile M&A through abolition of Restriction on Possessing Large Quantities of Shares in Securities Transactions Law in March 1997. Under these circumstances, there occurred several instances where leading domestic firms had their management rights threatened by foreign firms. In this study we conduct a comparative analysis of M&A regulatory systems in the USA, EU and Japan, the representative precedents, at the same time, focusing closely on South Korea's defensive means against hostile M&A. By doing so we present legislature changes that need to be improved or complemented in the future and also examine legal appropriateness of such defensive actions. The purpose of this study is to establish assistance in solving problems on the hostile M&A.
Abstract
Lately Mergers and acquisitions are increased in business world of Korea. M&A serve as effective means for growth of companies and for restructuring small, medium and venture businesses to make them more competitive. In order to mature the M&A market offensive tactics with defensive tactics are indispensible to be arranged. These incidents have triggered demand for legislative measures that allow firms to take appropriate actions to shield management rights from hostile M&A and for solution to the problem of domestic companies being discriminated both positively or negatively in foreign M&A. Poison pill is any tactic by a company designed to avoid a hostile takeover. Consequently key countries are working to improve their M&A-related institutions and our country (South Korea) have also abolished regulations that help companies defend themselves against hostile M&A through abolition of Restriction on Possessing Large Quantities of Shares in Securities Transactions Law in March 1997. Under these circumstances, there occurred several instances where leading domestic firms had their management rights threatened by foreign firms. In this study we conduct a comparative analysis of M&A regulatory systems in the USA, EU and Japan, the representative precedents, at the same time, focusing closely on South Korea's defensive means against hostile M&A. By doing so we present legislature changes that need to be improved or complemented in the future and also examine legal appropriateness of such defensive actions. The purpose of this study is to establish assistance in solving problems on the hostile M&A.
참고문헌 (51)
- "현대회사법론" (2001), 삼지원
- "M&A법제의 개선방안 연구", (50) (2004), 한국상장회사협의회
- "적대적 M&A에 대한 이사의 방어행위기준", 18집(2) (2005), 한국상사판례학회
- "적대적 M&A와 회사법 개정", 20(2) (2006), 기업법학회
- "적대적 M&A에 대한 방어수단의 국제비교와 시사점", 20(1) (2006), 기업법학회
- "미국의 Poison Pill에 관한 동향", 20(1) (2006)
- "포이즌필의 이용방안과 문제점", 20(3) (2006), 기업법학회
- "포이즌 필의 도입가능성", (12) (2005), 서울대학교 금융법센터
- "의무공개매수의 법정책적 함의와 그 도입 가능성", (12) (2005), 서울대학교 금융법센터
- "M&A법제를 둘러싼 최근의 쟁점과 과제", 20(3) (2006)
- "경영권방어기준에 관한 판례분석-현대엘리베이터 사건의 시사점을 중심으로", (2005(Ⅱ)) (2005), 기업소송연구회
- "유럽연합의 공개매수제도에 관한 연구", 23(3) (2004), 한국상사법학회
- "적대적 공개매수에 대한 방어행위와 그 적법성에 관한 연구-미국법을 중심으로" (1993), 울산대학교
- "정관규정에 의한 M&A 방어대책, -Shark Repellent를 중심으로", 14집(1) (1995)
- "M&A: 기업인수 합병", pp.400~401 (1997), 법문사
- "공개매수제도에 관한 고찰-적대적 M&A에 대한 방어를 중심으로", 24(3) (2005), 상사법학회
- "포이즌 필의 도입에 관한 입법론적 고찰", 20(2) (2006)
- "종류주식의 다양화", (2005(Ⅱ)) (2005)
- "회사법 개정방향에 관한 연구" (2004), 한국상장회사협의회
- "M&A의 현황과 보완과제", (2006-1) (2006)
- "상장회사의 M&A제도 개선의견" (2005)
- "상법 중 회사편 개정안에 대한 의견" (2006)
- "주권상장법인 정관 기재유형 조사 분석 결과" (2006)
- "해외투기자본 유입증가에 따른 적대적 M&A 위험 및 대응방안" (2006)
- "경영권 안정을 위한 상법상 주식법제 개선과제", pp.2~ (2006)
- "일본의 경영권방어관련 회사법개정 동향과 시사점", 04, pp.3~ (2005)
- "해외자본의 유입증가에 다른 적대적 M&A 위협 및 대응방향", pp.7~8 (2006)
- "경영권 안정을 위한 상법상 주식법제 개선과제", pp.10~11 (2006)
- "국내 및 해외의 적대적 M&A 사례와 시사점", 03 (2005)
- "상법 개정(시안)에 대한 의견" (2006)
- "SK주식회사 IR활동 사례" (2006), 한국 IR협의회
- "Can a board say no when shareholders say yes?", 60 (2005)
- "The Contrasting Models of Corporate Control in Pennsylvania and Delaware Viewed Through", pp.27~
- "Final Report of High Level Group of Company Law Experts" (2002)
- "Corporation Law, West group" (2000)
- "Das neue Übernahmenrecht" (2002)
- "Fundmentals of Securities Regulation" (2001), Aspen Law & Business
- "The Promise of State Takeover Statutes", pp.86~ (1988)
- "Delaware's Intermediate Standard for Defensive Tactics Is there Substance to Proportionality Review" (1989)
- "Report on Issues related to Takeover Bids" (2002)
- "World Investment Report" (2004)
- "買收防衛策と「企業價値」の意義-ニッポン放送事件およびニレコ事件題材にして", (1749) (2005)
- "敵對的企業買收の法理論" (2000), 九州大學出版會
- "？G？？？I？？？？？h？q？？-？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？[？？？`？？？？？？？w ？？" (2005), ？？？c？@？l ？o？Z？Y？？？？？？？？
- "議決權制限株式を利用した買收防衛策", (1274) (2005)
- "？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？[？？？`？？？？？？？w？？？？", (1734) (2005)
- "？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？Z" (1999), ？M？R？？
- "改正法と敵對的買收防衛策", (304) (2006), 有斐閣
- "ニッポン放送新株豫約權發行差止假處分申立事件決定とその意義 (上), (下)", (1729-1730) (2005)
- "米國各洲におけを企業買收規制立法の最近狀況(上)", (1722) (2005)
- "唐慤ㅛ？Hㅇㅖㅞ폐？I렝？l？措？(？？)-ⅣⅧνΓΘㅞ？？？I？？？？？Z？制？？C？？ㅘㅇㅖ", (1694) (2005)