업무상 배임죄에 있어 배임행위와 경영판단행위의 관련성
In Breach of trust in business, ‘Breach of trust’ concept ‘business judgment’ the relevance of the concept
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Corporate executive officer of the duty of care and loyalty of a good manager with all companies operating in duty is discovered, unlike the results expected to cause damage to companies and shareholders are often cases. As such executive officer liable for damages to the area under the so-called business judgment rule to the head of this business allows companies to operate the driving force that provides an opportunity that is true. However, despite these advantages in the field of criminal law principles, if you want to introduce will have to be cautious. Especially with regard to breach of trust business, the actor’s subjective business judgment rule and the relevant portions of which corresponds to the configuration requirements. And the business judgment rule and the duty of care consists of faithful duty, the breach of it, which is essentially an act of treason that the principle of good faith can be considered as included in the concept. Therefore, to examine the breach of trust business, the business judgment rule by the Supreme Court, even if you do not use the concept of breach of trust that corresponds to the important concept of the principle of good faith can play through the full judgment. Therefore, the concept of management decisions in business,citing breach think it makes unnecessary the introduction of the concept. Rather, breach of trust, which is essentially a principle of good faith and that baesinseong duplication and confusion concept is to bring concerns. Thus, the concept of other criminal laws and to recognize it if you want to introduce the concept and justification for the need for care should be to examine.
Abstract
Corporate executive officer of the duty of care and loyalty of a good manager with all companies operating in duty is discovered, unlike the results expected to cause damage to companies and shareholders are often cases. As such executive officer liable for damages to the area under the so-called business judgment rule to the head of this business allows companies to operate the driving force that provides an opportunity that is true. However, despite these advantages in the field of criminal law principles, if you want to introduce will have to be cautious. Especially with regard to breach of trust business, the actor’s subjective business judgment rule and the relevant portions of which corresponds to the configuration requirements. And the business judgment rule and the duty of care consists of faithful duty, the breach of it, which is essentially an act of treason that the principle of good faith can be considered as included in the concept. Therefore, to examine the breach of trust business, the business judgment rule by the Supreme Court, even if you do not use the concept of breach of trust that corresponds to the important concept of the principle of good faith can play through the full judgment. Therefore, the concept of management decisions in business,citing breach think it makes unnecessary the introduction of the concept. Rather, breach of trust, which is essentially a principle of good faith and that baesinseong duplication and confusion concept is to bring concerns. Thus, the concept of other criminal laws and to recognize it if you want to introduce the concept and justification for the need for care should be to examine.
참고문헌 (35)
- 강대섭, "이사의 책임과 경영판단의 원칙", 창원대학교 사회과학연구, 7
- 강희갑, "경영판단의 원칙에 관한 미국법의 최근동향", 상사법연구, 15(2) (1996)
- 김일수, "형법각론(제6판)" (2004), 박영사
- 김택주, "경영판단의 원칙의 적용요건", 기업법연구, 20(1), pp.41~70 (2006), 한국기업법학회
- 박상기, "형법각론(제6판)" (2005), 박영사
- 배종대, "형법각론(제6전정판)" (2006), 홍문사
- 석종현, "일반행정법(상) 제9판" (2002), 삼영사
- 이규훈, "업무상배임죄와 경영판단", 형사판례연구, 13 (2005)
- 이경열, "경영판단의 과오와 업무상배임죄의 성부", 법조, 55(12), pp.122~159 (2006), 법조협회
- 이문지, "회사법의 경제학적 구조" (1999), 자유기업센터
- 이영봉, "경영판단의 법칙에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.1999
- 이재상, "형법각론(제5판)" (2004), 박영사
- 이정민, "경영판단원칙과 업무상 배임죄", 형사정책연구, 18(4), pp.159~188 (2007), 한국형사정책연구원
- 안경옥, "배임죄에 있어서 실해발생의 위험", 비교형사법연구, 2 (2000)
- 오영근, "형법각론" (2005), 박영사
- 임웅, "형법각론" (2007), 법문사
- 임대규, "배임죄에 있어서의 임무위배행위, In 재판자료 제50집 : 형사법에 관한 제문제(하)" (1990), 법원행정처
- 임중호, "주식회사 이사의 반자본단체적 행위에 대한 형사책임, In 현대의 형사법학(익헌 박정근박사 화갑기념 논문집)", ~ (1990)
- 전삼현, "회사법의 쟁점" (1999), 자유기업센타
- 정봉진, "이사의 주의의무와 경영판단의 법칙간의 관계에 관한 미국법 고찰", 상사법연구, 21(2), pp.8~366 (2002), 한국상사법학회
- 정성근, "형법각론(제2판)" (2006), 삼지원
- 천종철, "배임죄에 있어서의 임무위배행위", 연세법학연구, 3 (1995)
- Charles Hansen, "The Duty of Care, In The Business Judgment Rule" (1993), The American Law Institute
- "Corporate Governance Project, 48 Bus.Law. 1369(1993)Claus Roxin, Strafrecht AT, Band I, 4.Aufl.", ~ (2006)
- "Dodge v. Ford Motor Co, 204 Mich 459, 508, 170 NW 668, 684", ~ (1919)
- Harry G. Henn, "Law of Corporation(4th ed.)" (1983), West
- Hans-Heinrich Jescheck, "Lehrbuch des Strafrechts, 4.Aufl.", ~ (1988)
- Henn, "Law of Corporation, 3rd ed." (1983), West Publishing Co.
- James M. Tobin, "The Squeeze on Directors - Inside is Out", Bus. Law, 49, pp.1707~1714 (1994)
- LK-Hirsch, "StGB-Kommentar, 11.Aufl.", ~ (1994)
- Sch, "StGB-Kommentar, 26. Aufl.", ~ (2001)
- The American Law Institute, "Principles of Corporate Governance: Analysis and Recommendations, Vol.1" (1994), American Law Institute Publishers
- William E. Knepper, "Liability of Corporate Officers and Directors 6th ed", ~ (1998)
- 北澤正啓, "會社法(新版)" (1982), 靑林書院
- 吉永榮助, "取締役の一般義務", 一橋論叢, 19(4)