다중대표소송의 발전방향에 관한 연구
The Future of Multiple Derivative Action - Presenting a Desirable Destination for Its Legal Development -
0
조회
0
다운로드
18
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
It is, nowadays especially in the twenty-first century South Korea, not frequent for an active shareholder to institute a derivative action against the incumbent directors or officers of his or her company. It has been absolutely rare, in the prior century, to see the derivative suit in Korean business circle. The plaintiffs of this litigation in Korea are now overwhelmingly the non-governmental organizations, like People’s Alliance of Korea (Cham–Yeo-Yun- Dae), etc. They are eager to show ‘an economic democracy’ through this type of litigation. Until now, there have been some cases of simple derivative suit. The most famous one was a case, Cham-Yeo-Yun-Dae vs. Samsung Electronics, sentenced on October 28th, 2005, with the Docket Nr. 2003 Da 69638, in which the Court applied ‘business judgment rule’ and limited the liability of directors. In the year of 2004, the Supreme Court of Korea delivered the famous case on the ‘double derivative suit’ for the first time. The High Court of Seoul made a decision in favour of the plaintiff and introduced the double derivative suit judicially for the first time in Korean peninsula. The defendant appealed and the Supreme Court reversed the original decision. It rejected any analogical interpretation of Sec. 403 subsection (1) Korean Commercial Code and sentenced that the plaintiff did not have any standing for this type of litigation. Scholars are now trying to find a path to introduce multiple derivative suit in Korea. In American corporate law, the double derivative suit is nowadays legal-theoretically through the following paths on the way ; (1) piercing the corporate veil, (2) common control theory, (3) the fiduciary relationship between the shareholder and company, (4) deterrence and compensation theory. The best way, according to the author, is the judicial one, the establishing sufficient case law, like in England, in Hong Kong etc. Japan has recently revised the “New Company Act, 2006” and newly codified the double or multiple derivative actions. But the new provisions permit such an action, only if the parent owns all the shares of its subsidiary. So the ‘new provision’ is not so meaningful for the perspective of practicality. The scope of applicability is from the beginning too narrow to achieve a satisfatory result. The author tried to show the legal situation around the multiple derivative actions worldwide and tried to show the hopeful future of this institute.
Abstract
It is, nowadays especially in the twenty-first century South Korea, not frequent for an active shareholder to institute a derivative action against the incumbent directors or officers of his or her company. It has been absolutely rare, in the prior century, to see the derivative suit in Korean business circle. The plaintiffs of this litigation in Korea are now overwhelmingly the non-governmental organizations, like People’s Alliance of Korea (Cham–Yeo-Yun- Dae), etc. They are eager to show ‘an economic democracy’ through this type of litigation. Until now, there have been some cases of simple derivative suit. The most famous one was a case, Cham-Yeo-Yun-Dae vs. Samsung Electronics, sentenced on October 28th, 2005, with the Docket Nr. 2003 Da 69638, in which the Court applied ‘business judgment rule’ and limited the liability of directors. In the year of 2004, the Supreme Court of Korea delivered the famous case on the ‘double derivative suit’ for the first time. The High Court of Seoul made a decision in favour of the plaintiff and introduced the double derivative suit judicially for the first time in Korean peninsula. The defendant appealed and the Supreme Court reversed the original decision. It rejected any analogical interpretation of Sec. 403 subsection (1) Korean Commercial Code and sentenced that the plaintiff did not have any standing for this type of litigation. Scholars are now trying to find a path to introduce multiple derivative suit in Korea. In American corporate law, the double derivative suit is nowadays legal-theoretically through the following paths on the way ; (1) piercing the corporate veil, (2) common control theory, (3) the fiduciary relationship between the shareholder and company, (4) deterrence and compensation theory. The best way, according to the author, is the judicial one, the establishing sufficient case law, like in England, in Hong Kong etc. Japan has recently revised the “New Company Act, 2006” and newly codified the double or multiple derivative actions. But the new provisions permit such an action, only if the parent owns all the shares of its subsidiary. So the ‘new provision’ is not so meaningful for the perspective of practicality. The scope of applicability is from the beginning too narrow to achieve a satisfatory result. The author tried to show the legal situation around the multiple derivative actions worldwide and tried to show the hopeful future of this institute.
참고문헌 (37)
- 권재열, "2013년 상법상 다중대표소송 도입안에 관한비교법적 검토", 증권법연구, 14(2), pp.89~113 (2013), 한국증권법학회
- 김정호, "다중대표소송관련 상법개정안의 문제점", 법률신문, 2013. 9. 5. 자, 12~ (2013)
- 김정호, "이중대표소송에 대한 연구", 경영법률, 17(1), pp.221~290 (2006), 한국경영법률학회
- 김정호, "다중대표소송의 도입방안에 관한 연구", 경영법률, 23(4), pp.209~254 (2013), 한국경영법률학회
- 菊地 伸, "會社法 改正法案の解說と企業の實務對策" (2014), 淸文社
- 三原秀哲, "改正 會社法の要點がわかる本" (2014), SE(Shoeisha)
- Anderson, Mary, "When A Shareholder Receives Shares of an Acquiring Corporation as Consideration in a Merger, the Shareholder's Derivative Action Against the Acquired Company May Still Exist as a Double Derivative Action, Lambrecht v. O’Neal, 3 A. 3d 277,(Del. 2010)", T.T.N.J.B.L, 12, pp.223~225 (2010)
- Austin, "Ford’s Principles of Corporations Law" (2010), LexisNexis
- Bailey James, "Multiple Derivative Actions in Company Law : Can You or Can’t You?", Company Lawyer, 34(10), pp.302~304 (2013)
- Bühring-Uhle, Christian, "Aktionärsklage und Konzernklage im amerikanischen Recht – ein Modell?", pp.41~53 (1989), AG
- Chew, Margaret, "Minority Shareholder’s Rights and Remedies" (2006), LexisNexis
- Choo, Pearlie Koh Ming, "The Statutory Derivative Action in Singapore – A Critical & Comparative Examination-", Bond LR, 13, pp.64~ (2001)
- Eisenberg, Melvin A., "The Structure of the Corporation – A Legal Anaysis" (2006), Beard Books
- Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP, "Canada Business Corporations Act & Commentary" (2013), LexisNexis
- Fischel, "Symposium: The Role of Liability Rules and the Derivative Suit in Corporate Law : A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis", Cornell Law Rev, 71 (1986)
- Gower, "Principles of Modern Company Law" (2013), Sweet & Maxwell
- Hollington, "Shareholders’ Rights" (2010), Sweet & Maxwell
- Joffe, "Minority Shareholders, : Law, Practice and Procedure" (2008), Oxford University Press
- Kim Jeong-Ho, "Die Einzelklagebefugnis des Gesellschafters beim Ersatzprozess für die Gesellschaft", pp.1990
- Lightman, "Two Aspects of the Statutory Derivative Claim", LMCLQ, pp.142~ (2011)
- Lipton, "Understanding Company Law" (2006), Lawbook Co.
- Locascio, David, "The Dilemma of the Double Derivative Suit", North Western University Law Review, 83, pp.729~759
- Lord Millett, "Multiple Derivative Actions", Gore-Browne Bulletin (2010)
- Loughrey, Joan, "Directors’ Duties & Shareholder Litigation in the Wake of the Financial Crisis, Corporations, Globalisation and the Law" (2013), Edward Elgar
- Mascarenhas Trevor, "Multiple Derivative Actions under English Law", International Company and Commercial Law Review, pp.336~339 (2013)
- Mayson, "French & Ryan on Company Law" (2013), Oxford Univ. Press
- Morse, "Charlesworth’s Company Law" (2005), Sweet & Maxwell
- Painter, "Remedies of Stockholder of Parent Corporation for Injuries to Subsidiaries", Harvard Law Review, 50, pp.963~968 (1937)
- "Palmer’s Company Law" (2014), Sweet & Maxwell
- Prentice, "Multiple Derivative Action", L.Q.R, 125, pp.209~ (2009)
- Litigation by Shareholders and Directors, - An Empirical Study on the Statutory Derivative Action, "Ramsay", Centre for Corporate Law & Securities Regulations, ~ (2006)
- Redmond, Paul, "Corporations and Financial Markets Law" (2013), Lawbooks Co.
- Reisberg Arad, "Derivative Actions and Corporate Governance-Theory and Operation -" (2007), Oxford Univ. Press
- Saleem Sheikh, "A Guide to the Companies Act 2006" (2008), Routledge-Cavendish, Taylor & Francis Group
- Tan Cheng-Han, "Multiple Derivative Actions", L.Q.R, 129, pp.337~ (2013)
- Taylor Lynne, "Company and Securities Laws in New Zealand" (2013), Thomson Reuters
- Yu, Zheng, "Proposing Double Derivative Action in China - Justification and Practical Issues", Company Lawyer, 33(6), pp.185~192 (2012)