글로벌 금융위기 이후 자산유동화거래에 대한 법적 규제의 현안과 개선방향
Legal Issues in Regulation of Securitization Transactions after Global Financial Crisis and Direction for Regulatory Reform
0
조회
0
다운로드
8
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Law Concerning Asset-Backed Securitization (the “Securitization Law”),which was promulgated in 1998, has made significant contributions to thepromotion of asset-backed securities markets in the Republic of Korea. Sincethe occurrence of the global financial crisis, however, we have seeninternational trend of strengthening the regulation of financial industry,including securitization. Further, during the recent several years, thetransaction volume of securitization which is implemented outside theSecuritization Law (the “Non-Registered Securitization”) has been significantlyincreasing. In oder to better protect the investors’ interests and the stabilityof the financial system under the changed environments, it is time to makeimprovements to the overall regulatory scheme and the oversight andregulation with regard to securitization. This article compares and analayzesthe recent transactional trends and regulation of securitization in the U.S.,Japan and Korea and proposes that the following improvements be made:First, it is necessary to establish clear statutory guidelines for thedistinction between collective investments and securitization. The FinancialInvestment Services and Capital Markets Act (the “Capital Markets Act) hasestablished a comprehensive definition for the term “collective investment”,which belongs to one of the financial investment services regulated underthe Capital Markets Act and then, exempts the securitization transactionseffected under the Securitization Law from the regulation of collectiveinvestments. Due to the lack of statutory guidelines, it is not clear how theNon-Registered Securitization may be distinguished from the collectiveinvestment. Therefore, in order to minimize the legal uncertainties and thepossibility for regulatory arbitrage, it is necessary to establish clear statutoryor regulatory guidelines to distinguish “securitization” from “collectiveinvestments.” Secondly, it is desirable to strengthen the disclosure regulationsapplicable to securitization under the Capital Markets Act, particularly, withrespect to the Non-Registered Securitization. Finally, it is desirable tostrengthen the oversight and regulation of the Non-Registered Securitizationfor better protection of investors’ interests and for the sound investmentpractices. For this purpose, the Securitization Law needs to be improved. Itmay also be considered making certain provisions of the Securitization Lawmandatorily applicable to the Non-Registered Securitization. With respect tothe securitization transactions whose underlying assets are derivatives orderivatives-linked securities, it would be desirable to treat such transactionsbased on their economic substance and regulate similarly to the derivativesor derivatives-linked securities.
Abstract
The Law Concerning Asset-Backed Securitization (the “Securitization Law”),which was promulgated in 1998, has made significant contributions to thepromotion of asset-backed securities markets in the Republic of Korea. Sincethe occurrence of the global financial crisis, however, we have seeninternational trend of strengthening the regulation of financial industry,including securitization. Further, during the recent several years, thetransaction volume of securitization which is implemented outside theSecuritization Law (the “Non-Registered Securitization”) has been significantlyincreasing. In oder to better protect the investors’ interests and the stabilityof the financial system under the changed environments, it is time to makeimprovements to the overall regulatory scheme and the oversight andregulation with regard to securitization. This article compares and analayzesthe recent transactional trends and regulation of securitization in the U.S.,Japan and Korea and proposes that the following improvements be made:First, it is necessary to establish clear statutory guidelines for thedistinction between collective investments and securitization. The FinancialInvestment Services and Capital Markets Act (the “Capital Markets Act) hasestablished a comprehensive definition for the term “collective investment”,which belongs to one of the financial investment services regulated underthe Capital Markets Act and then, exempts the securitization transactionseffected under the Securitization Law from the regulation of collectiveinvestments. Due to the lack of statutory guidelines, it is not clear how theNon-Registered Securitization may be distinguished from the collectiveinvestment. Therefore, in order to minimize the legal uncertainties and thepossibility for regulatory arbitrage, it is necessary to establish clear statutoryor regulatory guidelines to distinguish “securitization” from “collectiveinvestments.” Secondly, it is desirable to strengthen the disclosure regulationsapplicable to securitization under the Capital Markets Act, particularly, withrespect to the Non-Registered Securitization. Finally, it is desirable tostrengthen the oversight and regulation of the Non-Registered Securitizationfor better protection of investors’ interests and for the sound investmentpractices. For this purpose, the Securitization Law needs to be improved. Itmay also be considered making certain provisions of the Securitization Lawmandatorily applicable to the Non-Registered Securitization. With respect tothe securitization transactions whose underlying assets are derivatives orderivatives-linked securities, it would be desirable to treat such transactionsbased on their economic substance and regulate similarly to the derivativesor derivatives-linked securities.
참고문헌 (54)
- 강희철, "자산유동화법에 의한 자산유동화의 한계와 이를 극복하기 위한 수단으로서의 비정형유동화에 관한 고찰", 증권법연구, 4(1), pp.177~238 (2003), 한국증권법학회
- 권종호, "일본의 투자신탁제도(CIS) - 일본금융상품거래법해설(2)-", 증권법연구, 8(1), pp.273~303 (2007), 한국증권법학회
- "자산유동화실무안내", 금융감독원, ~ (2012)
- 금융감독원, "CP(기업어음) 발행시 증권신고서 제출의무가 강화됩니다", 보도자료, ~ (2013)
- 김건식, "자본시장법 제3판" (2013), 두성사
- 김건식, "미국의 증권규제" (2001), 홍문사
- "2013년 ABS 발행시장 분석" (2014), 김경무[URL]
- "2012년 ABS 발행시장 분석" (2013), 김경무[URL]
- "미공시 ABCP시장의 현주소 신용파생상품거래의 블랙홀 되나?" (2012), 김경무[URL]
- 김연미, "유동화 증권에 있어 계속적인 공시에 관한 연구", 증권법연구, 8(1), pp.175~200 (2007), 한국증권법학회
- 김용호, "자산유동화의현상과 과제(제1권)" (2009), 소화
- 김은집, "수익증권발행신탁 관련 자본시장법상 제 문제", 선진상사법률연구, (59)통권 : 59, pp.218~238 (2012), 법무부[DOI]
- "2012년 자산유동화증권 시장 분석 및 2013년 전망" (2013), 김홍미[URL]
- 류혁선, "개정 신탁법상 자기신탁 및 수익증권발행제도를 활용한 유동화 금융투자상품 설계에 대한 연구", 증권법연구, 14(2), pp.459~499 (2013), 한국증권법학회
- 박준, "서브프라임 대출관련 금융위기의 원인과 금융법의 새로운 방향 모색", 국제거래법연구, 17(2), pp.3~57 (2008), 국제거래법학회
- 박준, "기업금융활성화와 신종증권에 관한 자본시장법의 개정", 상사판례연구, 24(3), pp.29~93 (2011), 한국상사판례학회
- 박준, "자산유동화의 현상과 과제(제1권)" (2009), 소화
- 박훤일, "｢정동윤 선생 고희기념논문집" (2009), 법문사
- 박훤일, "횡천 이기수 선생 정년기념 세계화시대의 기업법" (2010), 박영사
- 법령제정 실무작업반, "간접투자자산운용업법해설" (2005), 박영사
- 성희활, "신탁법과 자본시장법의 바람직한 관계 설정에 대한 연구", 비교사법, 20(3), pp.637~674 (2013), 한국비교사법학회
- 안수현, "자산담보부기업어음(ABCP)에 관한 법제도적 문제", 한양법학, (29), pp.481~511 (2010), 한양법학회
- 오영표, "新신탁법 시행에 따른 자본시장법상의 법적 쟁점- 신탁법과 자본시장법의 조화로운 共存을 모색하며 -", 은행법연구, 5(1), pp.109~149 (2012), 은행법학회
- "2013년 자산유동화 시장 분석 및 204년 전망 , Special Report" (2014), 이종훈[URL]
- 자산유동화실무연구회, "금융혁명" (2000), 한국경제신문사
- 박준, "자산유동화의 현상과 과제(제1권)" (2009), 소화
- Troy C. Fuhriman, "The Global Financial Crisis & Asset-Backed Securitization Regulatory Responses Thereto in the EU and the United States", 법학논고, (43), pp.299~360 (2013), 법학연구원
- 한민, "신탁제도개혁과 자산유동화", BFL, (50) (2011), 서울대학교 금융법센터
- "集団投資スキームに関するワーキンググループ レポート, 中間整理(第一次)" (1999)[URL]
- 藤瀨裕司, "證券化ウィ-クルの法務と實務" (2009), 日本經濟出版社
- 山下友信, "金融商品取引法槪說" (2010), 有斐閣
- 小林秀之, "資産流動化證券化のV再構築" (2010), 日本評論社
- 日本證券經濟硏究所, "図說 日本の證券市場" (2012), 昭和情報プロセス(株)
- "証券化市場の動向調査のとりまとめ ~2013年度上半期の発行動向" (2013)[URL]
- "証券化商品に関するワーキング·グループ, “わが国の証券化市場の現状と課題- 市場活性化の観点から-" (2011)[URL]
- 長崎幸太郞, "改正 逐條解說資産流動化法" (2009), 金融財政事情硏究會
- 長島, "金融商品取引法" (2009), 商事法務
- 川北英隆, "證券化" (2012), 金融財政事情硏究會
- 川上嘉彦, "金融商品取引法施行後の資産流動化·証券化の実務", 金融法務事情, (1791) (2007)
- 橫尾光輔, "改正資産流動化法の解説(下)-従たる特定資産に係る特例制度を中心に-", 金融法務事情, (1939) (2012)
- 橫尾光輔, "改正資産流動化法の解説(上)-従たる特定資産に係る特例制度を中心に-", 金融法務事情, (1938) (2012)
- Christopher L. Culp, "U.S. Structured Finance Markets:Recent Recovery, Post-Crisis Developments, and Ongoing Regulatory Uncertainties", The Journal of Structured Finance, 18(Winter) (2013), Institutional Investor Journal
- David Ramos Munoz, "The Law of Transnational Securitization" (2010)
- Geoffrey Fuller, "The Law and Finance of International Capital Market" (2007), LexisNexis Butterworths
- "Strengthening Oversight and Regulation of Shadow Banking" (2013)[URL]
- Geoffrey Fuller, "The Law and Finance of International Capital Market" (2007), LexisNexis Butterworths
- 藤瀨裕司, "證券化ウィ-クルの法務と實務" (2009), 日本經濟出版社
- Securitization: Lessons Learned and the Rorad Ahead, "Miguel Segoviano", International Monetary Fund, ~, pp.IMF Working Paper (WP (2013), 13[DOI]
- Ronald S. Borod, "Securitization Reform Halftime Report", Banking & Fin. Services Pol’y Rep, 34(4) (2013)
- "Global CDO Issuance and Outstanding (xls)"[URL]
- "US Mortgage-Related Issuance and Outstanding (xls)"[URL]
- "US ABS Issuance and Outstanding (xls)"[URL]
- Steven L. Schwarcz, "Structured Finance" (2010), Practising Law Institute, Kindle e-book
- Global Developments in Securitisation Regulation, "The Board of The International Organization of Securities Commissions", ~, pp.Final Report (FR09 (2012), 12)