본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

업무상배임죄에 있어서 경영판단의 원칙

Business judgment rule on the crime of trust breach in business

0

조회

0

다운로드

4

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

In these days, the business judgment rule is dealt importantly in the criminal law. The reason is that if the criminal law intervenes excessively in the area of the corporate management, the manager's judgment and creative challenge mind are ignored and restrained. So it is possible to criticize that the result of the excessive intervenes of the criminal law leads to the shrinking of the corporate activities and brings the damage to the national economy finally. There is a confrontation of opinions whether the business judgment rule can be adopted as the principle of the limitation of the intervention of the criminal law in the control of the corporate crime, especially as the criminal law principle that limits the application of the crime of trust breach in business. In principle, the corporate's management should be based on the management's autonomy and initiative. So the corporate manager's free business judgment must be respected. Especially, the adventurous transaction is often followed in management, so the corporate manager must not be called to account of the criminal law for the only reason of the management result even if the injury happened in the course of the management of the company. The reason is that this is violated to the principle of the responsibility of the criminal law. However, the business judgment is not located outside area in the law even if it is the high degree management. Especially, because other sanctions except the criminal law is not effective in actually on the regulation of the corporate crime, the need for the control of the criminal law is called when the seriousness of the social damage that the corporate crime produces is considered. Today, because the social status of the enterprise is huge, the enterprise's influence is stronger than ever before. So the enterprise activity is no more only a individual's problem. It produces the social and public responsibility. Therefore, it is not unreasonable that impose the corporate social responsibility on the company. The practice of the corporate social responsibility is taken for granted as the common social principle that the corporate should observe now. Therefore, it came to the circumstance that enterprises accept the corporate social responsibility in some degree as rightful thing. It is regrettable that the discussion on the corporate crime has not considered the effective control plan on the corporate crime through the debate that understands essential characters of enterprise and the deep concern of the damage by the corporate crime as yet. Preferably, it may be leaned on the part of the theory of the criminal law. However, it may be the reasonable control plan what needs really now to settle the problem of the corporate crime. The reason is that through the plan the effort to promote the social trust and to recover the national sense of common bonds can be enlarged. On today, the control circumstance about the corporate crime is not so enough. In the situation, it is not always appreciated to apply the business judgment rule so easily only for the reason of the called peculiar management area of enterprise. Because it is undesirable to except the malpractice of the corporate like the crime of trust breach in business that the management commits in the control of the criminal law only for the reason. Nevertheless I can not agree to exclude the application of the business judgment rule in the problem of the crime of trust breach in business unconditionally without the reasonable reason. Because the business operations such the enterprise's initiative and free economic activities within the frame of market economy principle must be secured in principle. The reason is that it can contribute to enterprise's preservation and strengthening and the development of national economy through this. For the reason, the enterprise's autonomy and initiative must be respected also in the analysis of the crime of trust breach in business. Therefore, it is right to acknowledge the introduction of the business judgment rule in the analysis of the crime of trust breach in business. But it is desirable to make the corporate social responsibility the standard of the analysis that compose contents as the principle of judgment of the business judgment rule. This will encourage the practice by elevating realization of the enterprise about the corporate social responsibility. Also it will contribute to the development of the healthy and desirable national economy.

Abstract

In these days, the business judgment rule is dealt importantly in the criminal law. The reason is that if the criminal law intervenes excessively in the area of the corporate management, the manager's judgment and creative challenge mind are ignored and restrained. So it is possible to criticize that the result of the excessive intervenes of the criminal law leads to the shrinking of the corporate activities and brings the damage to the national economy finally. There is a confrontation of opinions whether the business judgment rule can be adopted as the principle of the limitation of the intervention of the criminal law in the control of the corporate crime, especially as the criminal law principle that limits the application of the crime of trust breach in business. In principle, the corporate's management should be based on the management's autonomy and initiative. So the corporate manager's free business judgment must be respected. Especially, the adventurous transaction is often followed in management, so the corporate manager must not be called to account of the criminal law for the only reason of the management result even if the injury happened in the course of the management of the company. The reason is that this is violated to the principle of the responsibility of the criminal law. However, the business judgment is not located outside area in the law even if it is the high degree management. Especially, because other sanctions except the criminal law is not effective in actually on the regulation of the corporate crime, the need for the control of the criminal law is called when the seriousness of the social damage that the corporate crime produces is considered. Today, because the social status of the enterprise is huge, the enterprise's influence is stronger than ever before. So the enterprise activity is no more only a individual's problem. It produces the social and public responsibility. Therefore, it is not unreasonable that impose the corporate social responsibility on the company. The practice of the corporate social responsibility is taken for granted as the common social principle that the corporate should observe now. Therefore, it came to the circumstance that enterprises accept the corporate social responsibility in some degree as rightful thing. It is regrettable that the discussion on the corporate crime has not considered the effective control plan on the corporate crime through the debate that understands essential characters of enterprise and the deep concern of the damage by the corporate crime as yet. Preferably, it may be leaned on the part of the theory of the criminal law. However, it may be the reasonable control plan what needs really now to settle the problem of the corporate crime. The reason is that through the plan the effort to promote the social trust and to recover the national sense of common bonds can be enlarged. On today, the control circumstance about the corporate crime is not so enough. In the situation, it is not always appreciated to apply the business judgment rule so easily only for the reason of the called peculiar management area of enterprise. Because it is undesirable to except the malpractice of the corporate like the crime of trust breach in business that the management commits in the control of the criminal law only for the reason. Nevertheless I can not agree to exclude the application of the business judgment rule in the problem of the crime of trust breach in business unconditionally without the reasonable reason. Because the business operations such the enterprise's initiative and free economic activities within the frame of market economy principle must be secured in principle. The reason is that it can contribute to enterprise's preservation and strengthening and the development of national economy through this. For the reason, the enterprise's autonomy and initiative must be respected also in the analysis of the crime of trust breach in business. Therefore, it is right to acknowledge the introduction of the business judgment rule in the analysis of the crime of trust breach in business. But it is desirable to make the corporate social responsibility the standard of the analysis that compose contents as the principle of judgment of the business judgment rule. This will encourage the practice by elevating realization of the enterprise about the corporate social responsibility. Also it will contribute to the development of the healthy and desirable national economy.

참고문헌 (45)

  1. 권오걸, "형법각론" (2009), 형설출판사
  2. 권오승, "경제법" (2009), 법문사
  3. 김광준, "한국의 신종 기업범죄에 관한 연구" (2002), 한국형사정책 연구원
  4. 김일수, "형법총론" (2006)
  5. 김현주, "양형책임의 의의와 양형사실의 범위에 관한 일고찰", 석사, pp.1996
  6. 노명선, "회사범죄에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2001
  7. 배종대, "형법총론" (2009), 홍문사
  8. 유병규, "기업범죄 수사의 효율성 제고방안" (2003), 한국형사정책연구원
  9. 이규훈, "경영판단과 업무상 배임죄", 석사, pp.2005
  10. 이상돈, "윤리경영과 형법" (2005), 신영사
  11. 이상복, "기업범죄와 내부통제" (2005), 삼우사
  12. 임완수, "기업범죄에 대한 형사적 고찰", 석사, pp.1996
  13. 정영덕, "부당내부거래에 대한 법적 고찰", 석사, pp.2007
  14. 정운용, "기업범죄에 대한 실증적 고찰과 윤리경영을 통한 기업의 대응방안", 석사, pp.2007
  15. 조준형, "양형에 관한 비교법적 고찰 및 합리화 방안 연구", 석사, pp.2006
  16. 피삼경, "기업범죄의 통제방안에 대한 연구", 석사, pp.2004
  17. Brent Fisse, "Corporations, Crime and Accountability" (1993), Cambridge University Press
  18. John Braithwaite, "Regulation, Crime, Freedom", pp.2000, Ashgate
  19. John Braithwaite, "Restorative Justice and Responsive Regulation" (2002), Oxford University Press
  20. John Braithwaite, "Global Business Regulation" (2000), Cambridge University Press
  21. 강동범, "경제범죄와 그에 대한 형법적 대응", 형사정책, (7) (1995), ,
  22. 권재열, "경영판단의 원칙", 비교사법, 6(1) (1996)
  23. 김명중, "일본기업의 사회적 책임:동향과 과제", 국제노동브리프, 4(4) (2006), 한국노동연구원
  24. 박강우, "기업범죄의 현황과 정책분석" (1999), 형사정책연구원
  25. 박강우, "최근 미국의 기업범죄 실태와 규제동향", 충북대학교 법학연구, 17(2) (2006)
  26. 박광섭, "기업범죄에 관한 연구", 충남대학교 법학연구, 14(1) (2003)
  27. 손혜경, "스웨덴 기업의 사회적 책임:배경과 동향", 국제노동브리프, 4(4) (2006), 한국노동연구원
  28. 송옥렬, "이사의 민사책임과 형사책임의 판단기준", 상사판례연구, 6 (2006)
  29. 이기헌, "법인범죄의 효율적 제재방안" (1996), 한국형사정책연구원
  30. 이용식, "위험사회에서의 법익보호와 적극적 일반예방", 형사정책, 13(1) (2001)
  31. 이종상, "이사의 책임과 배임죄에 대한 비판적 고찰", BFL, (19) (2006), ,
  32. 이호중, "기업범죄의 양형" (2008), 법률신문
  33. 임중호, "독일에서의 기업법이론" (1988), 법률신문
  34. 정미화, "기업범죄 양형의 문제점과 대안", 민주사회를 위한 변호사 모임 주최 ‘기업범죄 양형의 문제점과 대안’에 대한 토론회 (2007)
  35. 정성근, "기업범죄와 형사책임", 경희법학, 18(2) (1983)
  36. 조 국, "기업범죄 통제에 있어 형법의 역할과 한계’", 형사법연구, 19(3)
  37. 최병규, "미국법상 경영판단의 원칙과 우리나라에의 도입가능성", 안암법학, 12 (2001)
  38. 허일태, "배임죄에서의 행위주체와 손해의 개념", 비교형사법연구, 6(2-1), pp.137~158 (2004), 한국비교형사법학회
  39. 허일태, "위험사회에 있어서 형법의 임무", 비교형사법연구, 5(2-1), pp.1~32 (2003), 한국비교형사법학회
  40. HansLilie, "Risikogesellschaft und Strafrecht", 비교형사법연구, 5(2-1), pp.3~90 (2003), 한국비교형사법학회
  41. 전국경제인연합회, "윤리경영 추진실태와 과제", ~ (2007)
  42. -제5~제8차 회의-, "법원행정처", 2004
  43. KPMG, "International Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting", ~ (2008)
  44. Development Center for Chinese CSR, "2008 Corporate Social Responsibility : Status and Trend", ~ (2008)
  45. Centre of Responsible Business, "The State of CSR in Dubai 2007", ~ (2007)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (26건)