Suits지수 구성요소를 이용한 조세 공평성 분석

박한순 한국회계정책학회 2009 회계와 정책연구 Vol.14 No.1

This study applies the method of income inequality decomposition in terms of the Gini coefficient into decomposing tax inequality in terms of the Suits index. Using the decomposition methodologies, the current study tests empirically whether changes in Korean corporate income tax system achieve or increase tax equity. If the income recipients are classified into several groups according to their income, the Suits index is decomposed into the between-group, within-group and remaining components, and the changes in the value of the Suits index from pre-tax to post-tax income are also expressed as changes in the three components. The between-group component and its change are referred to vertical tax equity or pure tax progressivity with horizontal components. The within-group and remaining components and their changes are referred to horizontal tax equity. If the vertical equity is achieved, the between-group component is not only positive and increasing in trend but its change is not also negative and decreasing in trend. If the horizontal equity is achieved, the within-group and residual components and their changes will be close to and converge to zero through time. Based on the above hypotheses, this paper analyses 15 year data using graphs and the linear trend model to verify whether vertical and horizontal tax equities are achieved and increased through time. Testing is executed using univariate test, OLS regression, and bootstrap resampling method. As for the regression, the dependent variable is the change of year and the independent variables are the components or their changes in terms of the Suits index. The results are summarized as follows. First, the negative Suits index shows that the corporate income tax is regressive. Second, the horizontal tax inequality measured by the within-group Suits index shows negative value and increasing trend through time because of the largest firm group. Third, though income ranking changes after taxation show decreasing trend through time, its interpretation is marginal and restricted. 본 연구는 Gini계수를 집단간, 집단내 및 잔여분 Gini계수의 세 가지 구성요소로 분해하고 조세의 소득 재분배 효과를 그 구성요소의 변화로 측정하는 소득 공평성 분석 방법론을 Suits지수에 응용하여 수평적 및 수직적 조세 공평성 분석을 수행하는 새로운 연구방법론을 제시하였다. 그리고 Suits지수의 구성요소를 분해하는 방법론을 이용하여, 조세 공평성 제고라는 법인세제의 정책 목표대로 수직적 및 수평적 조세 공평성이 각 연도에 달성되었는지 또한 장기적으로 향상 추세에 있는지를 실증적으로 밝혔다. Suits지수 구성요소 또는 구성요소의 변화에 대한 단일변량분석 결과 및 이들을 독립변수로 한 선형추세모형을 이용한 OLS 회귀분석 및 Bootstrap 방법을 이용한 검정 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. Suits지수와 그 구성요소는 평균적으로 음의 값으로서, 우리나라 법인세는 소득이 높은 기업이 낮은 기업보다 상대적으로 적은 조세를 부담하는 역진적 조세이다. 집단간 Suits지수가 특별한 추세를 보이지 않은 것과 달리, 집단내 Suits지수는 최근 연도에 가까울수록 불공평성이 더욱 심화되는 추세를 보였다. 집단내 Suits지수가 음의 값이고 악화되는 추세를 보이는 결과는 30-40대 대기업 때문에 발생한 대기업 효과이다. 과세로 인한 소득순위 변동은 감소 추세를 보였지만, 그 결과와 해석은 제한적이다.

2020 도쿄 올림픽 태권도 경기복에 대한 논의 : 국가대표 여자선수 중심으로

안진영,안근아 한국스포츠학회 2020 한국스포츠학회지 Vol.18 No.1

이 연구는 2020 도쿄 올림픽 태권도 경기복에 대한 논의를 진행하는데 그 목적이 있었으며, 다음과 같은 결론을 도출하였다. 첫째, 올림픽 태권도 경기복의 장점은 2020 도쿄 올림픽을 대비하여 가라테와의 차별화를 위한 전략이라고 볼 수 있다. 기존 태권도복에 비해 가볍고, 밀착형이기 때문에 타격부위를 정확하게 보여준다. 그리고 상대방을 잡고 차는 반칙을 사전에 예방할 수 있으며, 발차기 수행을 원활하게 하였다. 둘째, 올림픽 태권도 경기복의 단점은 선수들이 민망함, 수치심, 불편함, 답답함 등을 호소하였다. 몸에 쪼이는 느낌으로 인해 평소보다 경기력에 방해가 되었고, 휴식시간에 도복 을 탈의해야만 보호 장비를 풀 수 있었다. 그리고 경기복이 얇아서 잘 찢어진다는 것과 태권도복의 펄럭임이 사라져 역동적 인 발차기의 모습이 나타나지 않았다. 셋째, 기존 태권도복과의 차이점으로는 기존의 흰색 태권도복이 태권도 발차기의 멋스러움을 더욱 돋보이게 하며, 청홍 선수를 보다 명확하게 구분할 수 있다. 무분별한 경기복의 도입은 태권도의 전통성 을 훼손할 수 있고, 현재 올림픽 태권도 경기복은 펜싱복과 유사하며, 앞으로 선수들의 부상방지를 위해 개선이 요구된다. The purpose of this study was to discuss Taekwondo suits for 2020 Tokyo Olympics. The results led to the following conclusions: First, one of the advantages of the Taekwondo suits for the Olympics is their strategy of differentiation from the Karate of Japan. The Taekwondo suits are lighter and more contact-type than the old ones, showing the target parts accurately. They also prevent the foul of holding the other player for kicking and contribute to the smooth performance of kicks. Secondly, the players mentioned the disadvantages of the Taekwondo suits for the Olympics, saying that they felt embarrassed, shame, uncomfortable, and suffocated in the suits. As they felt tight in the suits, they said that the suits hindered their usual performance. They had to take off the suits during a break in order to unfasten the protective gear. In addition, the suits were thin and prone to tear and did not flap to show the dynamic aspect of kicks no longer. Finally, the study also examined differences between the old Taekwondo suits and the new ones. The old white ones highlighted the fabulous kicks of Taekwondo and made it easy to distinguish Blue and Red players clearly. Given that the white Taekwondo suits are a symbol of Taekwondo, the introduction of indiscrete Taekwondo suits can damage the tradition of Taekwondo. The current Taekwondo suits for the Olympics are similar to the fencing suits and require improvements to prevent injuries for players.

첩전(諜戰) 드라마에 표현된 민국(民國)시기 남성 양복에 관한 분석 - <위장자(僞裝者)>와 <마작(麻雀)> 드라마를 중심으로 -

이애진 ( Li Aizhen ),김종무 ( Kim Jong-moo ) 커뮤니케이션디자인학회 2017 커뮤니케이션 디자인학연구 Vol.60 No.-

This paper mainly studies whether the male suits in the Chinese TV series The Disguiser and Sparrow are in accordance with the history of male suits during the Republican period. After classifying pictures collected according to shape, color, pattern, etc., a total of six Chinese and South Korean personnel working in the garment industry select 38 pictures to analyze. The analysis is based on modeling elements of suits, that is, clothing construction, silhouette, pattern, color schemes and main suits accessories. The results of the analysis are as follows. First, the general type of male suits during the Republican period are ensemble shoots consisting of blazers, shirts, pants and vests. Second, male suits in “The Disguiser are basically white shirts and vests, with blazers wearing outside, while most male suits in “Sparrow” adopt a formfitting style, including a variety of collar styles, lapel collar styles and vented styles. Third, male suits in “The Disguiser are of a loose style, the same as those in the Republican period. However, suits in “Sparrow” are different, with a formfitting style emphasizing chest line and waist line. Fourth, male suits in “The Disguiser” and during the Republican period are mainly of peaked lapel, semi-peaked lapel, notched lapel and other various single-breasted and double-breasted lapel styles. And pants are of a loose style with pleate. Nevertheless, most male suits in “Sparrow” are made up of One Button Blazers and pants without pleate, which did not exist in the Republican period. Fifth, shirts in the Republic period are mostly wing collar shirts and stand collar shirts. Wing collar shirts are usually wore with general suits, while stand collar shirts can match dress suits. Male suits in “The Disguiser” coincide with the history. However, in “ Sparrow” appears people who wear both long point collar shirts and general suits, which is incongruous with the history. Sixth, same as suits in the Republican period, male suits in “The Disguiser” adopt stripes and plaid patterns, with colors varying in black, dark gray, dark brown, blue and black, etc. Suits in Sparrow are similar in pattern with those in the Republican period, but richer in color. Seventh, accessories of suits in both The Disguiser, Sparrow are mainly ties, bow ties, hats and pocket watches, which are consistent with the historical record. It can be seen from the analysis above that male suits in “The Sparrow” are basically identical with the history of suits during the Republican period. However, suits in “Sparrow” adopt a different style in regard to modeling elements of silhouette, lapel style and vented style, etc.

남성복 구매형태에 따른 정보원 선택 , 위험지각 , 추구혜택의 차이에 관한 비교 연구

황선진(Sun Jin Hwang),김노호(No Ho Kim) 한국복식학회 2001 服飾(복식) Vol.51 No.7

The purpose of this study to compare the purchasing behaviour of men`s business suits, among custom suits, system order, and ready-made suits, centering around the choice of information source, risk perception and benefits sought. The survey of this study was collected from 450 adult male in Seoul. The data was analyzed by factor analysis and ANOVA. The result of this study were as follows : 1. Custom suits, system order, and ready-made suits consumers have a significant difference in the choice of information source. The consumer attaching most importance to the impersonal information source is the system order users, custom suits users, and ready-made suits users respectively. However there was no significant difference in the personal source among 3 different purchasing behaviour of men`s suits. 2. For the risk perception, 1) the group who perceived the highest in economic risk is the system order users, followed by custom suits users, and ready-made suits users. 2) the group who perceived performance risk as being the highest concern is the ready-made suits consumers, followed by system order user, and custom suits user. 3) the group who perceived the socio-psychological risk as the Highest is the ready-made suits consumers, and followed by custom suits user and system order users. 4) there is no difference among the three groups with respect to the fashionability loss risk. 5) the group of the highest perceiving the useful loss risk is the ready-made suits consumers, and the next is system order users, custom suits users. 6) the group of the highest perceiving the time and convenience loss risk is ready-made suits users, and the next is system order users, custom suits users. 3. For the benefit sought, the group of the highest perceiving the aesthetics is custom suits consumers, and the next is system order users, ready-made suits users.

대일전후보상소송과 국제인도법

박배근 동북아역사재단 2009 東北亞歷史論叢 Vol.- No.25

‘대일전후보상소송’은 청구의 유형과 법적 쟁점이 다양하다. 국제법적으로는 국제인도법에 기초한 피해자 개인청구권의 성립 여부가 주된 쟁점이 되어 왔다. 일본 국내 판결 중 대표적인 몇 개의 사례를 통하여, ‘개인청구권’으로 표현되는 법적 쟁점이 실제로 어떻게 다루어졌으며 어떤 개념적 오해와 혼란이 있는지를 검토하는 것이 본고의 목적이다. 우선 재판에서는 국제인도법이라고 하는 국제법을 근거로 청구가 제기되었기 때문에 개인의 국제법 주체성이 쟁점이 되었다. 다음으로, 개인의 국제법 주체성이라는 쟁점과도 연결된 문제로서 헤이그 육전협약 제3조상의 의무의 상대방이 국가인지 개인인지의 문제가 공방의 대상이 되었다. 마지막으로 국제법을 일본 국내 법원에서 직접적용하는 문제가 다투어졌다. 국제인도법을 청구의 근거로 삼은 대일전후보상소송은 일본의 국내 법원에서 제기된 소송이므로 국제법상 개인의 국제법주체성에 관한 일반 이론적인 논의나 주장을 펼칠 이유가 없었다. 소송은 국제법을 일반적으로 수용하고 있는 일본의 국내 법원에 제기된 것이므로, 재판에서 원용된 조약(또는 관습국제법) 규정이 개인의 권리를 규정하고 있으며 그것이 일본 국내 법원에서 재판의 기준으로 직접적용될 수 있는지의 여부가 핵심적인 쟁점이다. 판결은 헤이그 육전협약 제3조의 해석을 통하여 국가책임의 법리와 연결된 개인의 국제법주체성 부인의 논리로 원고의 청구 적격을 부정하고, 문제가 된 조약의 국내적용가능성에 관해서는 판단하지 않았다. 이는 원고의 청구가 국제법을 근거로 한 것이기는 하지만 일본의 국내법원에 제기되었다는 사실이 지니는 법적 의미를 심각하게 오해한 것이다. 피고와 판결은 헤이그 육전협약 제3조상의 해석론에 근거하여 개인의 국제법주체성을 부정하였지만, 이는 동 조항의 기초과정을 완전히 무시한 해석으로서 받아들이기 어렵다. 조약의 직접적용성이라는 관점에서 보면 일본 법원은 개인의 국제법주체성과 국가책임의 법리에 의존함이 없이 헌법 규정과 재판상의 실무 관행에 따라 헤이그 육전협약 제3조나 헤이그 육전규칙 및 기타 국제인도법상의 규정을 적용하여 피해자에 대한 구제를 부여할 것인지를 판단하는 것이 옳았다. 결론적으로 일본 사법부는 현대 국제법의 발전과 변화를 도외시하고 편협하고 낡은 국제법의 법리를 동원하여 일본군의 국제인도법 위반에 따른 피해의 구제나 국제인도법이 개인에게 부여한 권리의 실현을 거부하였다. 일본 정부 또는 사법부가 전후처리문제를 대하는 태도를 변화시키지 않는 한, 국가의 논리에 매몰당함이 없이 피해자에게 정당한 배상과 보상을 주는 전후처리의 실현은 불가능할 것으로 보인다. Various claims and legal issues have been raised and addressed in the so-called“ After War Compensation”suits against Japan which were brought to the Japanese domestic courts. Among them, whether victims’individual claims rights based on international humanitarian law should be recognized or not has been one of the most salient issue of international law. This study is to review how this issue of international law, namely the problem of“ individual claims rights”based on international law, has been treated by the plaintiffs, the defendants and the courts in the concrete suits. Through the critical review and examination of the problem, it also tries to clarify some conceptual misunderstandings of and confusion with the concept. In the After War Compensation suits, submissions to the Japanese domestic courts were partly based on international humanitarian law which composes a part of international law. So the problem of individual as a subject of international law became an object of keen debate. Whether State’s obligation provided in the Article 3 of the Hague Laws and Customs of War on Land Convention was owed towards other State Parties or individuals was another hot point of confrontation during the course of the suits. Whether relevant international law might be applied in the Japanese domestic courts to 192 동북아역사논총 25호 resolve the disputes also was a subject of controversy. As After War Compensation suits on the grounds of violation of international humanitarian law by Japanese government were raised before Japanese domestic courts, it was unnecessary for the parties to the suits to elaborate theoretical arguments concerning individual as a subject of international law. The suits were instituted before Japanese domestic courts and Japan has been generally incorporating international law as its domestic law. Therefore, what should be really contended were the problem whether individual’s right was stipulated in the treaties (or customary international law) invoked in the suits and, if it could be answered in the affirmative, whether those stipulations might be directly applicable as a criterion of judgment. The judgments of the suits negated plaintiffs’standing before the court on the ground that they could not be recognized as subjects of international law. They deduced this conclusion from the interpretation of the Article 3 of the Hague Laws and Customs of War on Land Convention. At the same time, they did not make any judgment with regard to the problem of the domestic applicability of the relevant treaties. This conclusion and attitude of the judgments seem to be the result of grave misunderstanding of the significance of the fact that plaintiffs’claims were submitted to the Japanese domestic courts, though their grounds were violation of rights vested to individuals by international law. The defendants and judgments of the suits were in concordance in that they both denied individual as a subject of international law through the interpretation of the Article 3 of the Hague Laws and Customs of War on Land Convention. However, this kind of interpretation of the provision lacks persuasiveness and is unacceptable when we take the travaux pre´aratoires of the Convention. When we see the problem under the perspective of the direct effect of treaty, it might be said that the Japanese courts would have been better to judge whether they should give remedy to the victims of Japanese government’s violation of international law solely in accordance with the courts practical usage and relevant article of the Japanese Constitution. It was not necessary for them to review and let their judgments be based on the discourse of individual as a subject of international law and the jurisprudence of State responsibility. Japanese courts’denial of allowing remedy to the victims of the violation of international humanitarian law and their refusal to implement individual’s rights under internation...

소득 불공평성, 조세 누진성 및 소득 재분배

박한순 한국회계정책학회 2010 회계와 정책연구 Vol.15 No.1

This paper analyzes two issues of corporate income tax data of listed firms in Korea published since 1990s. The first one is about the intersections of the Lorenz or tax curves. Sykes et al.(1987) demonstrate that intersections of Suits-related tax curves are implicated by intersections of Kakwani-related Lorenz curves. The second one is about the relationships between income inequality, tax system, tax progressivity, and redistributive effect of taxation using their summary measures, i.e., the Gini coefficient, the total tax rate, the Suits index, and the Reynolds-Smolensky index, respectively. According to the empirical result about the first issue, the tax curve crosses the proportionality line and the Lorenz curve for taxes crosses the Lorenz curve for income in 1993. Because of these intersections of curves, the Suits and Kakwani indices show the opposite signs. This implies the importance of checking whether the Lorenz or tax curves are intersecting. The empirical results about the second issue based on regression and path analyses are as follows. The Suits index is affected significantly by the total tax rate and affects significantly the Reynolds-Smolensky index. The signs of their coefficients are both positive. This means that tax progressivity is positively associated with the total tax rate and the redistributive effects of taxation are also positively associated with tax progressivity. According to path analysis, the Gini index indirectly affects the Reynolds-Smolensky index via the total tax rate and the Suits index though there were no direct effects on the Suits or Reynolds-Smolensky indices. 본 연구에서는 1990년대 이후 약 15년 동안 우리나라 상장기업의 법인세 자료를 이용하여, 조세 누진성과 관련된 두 가지 분석을 수행하였다. 첫째, Suits지수와 Kakwani지수의 상반된 부호와 관련된 곡선 교차 문제를 다루었다. 둘째, 조세 누진성과 소득 불공평성, 조세체계 및 소득 재분배와의 관계를 요약 지표인 Suits지수, Gini계수, 총평균세율, 그리고 Reynolds-Smolensky지수를 변수로 이용한 회귀모형과 경로모형으로 실증분석하였다. 첫째 주제의 결과에 의하면, 곡선 교차로 인하여 1993년에 Suits지수는 양이나 Kakwani지수는 음의 값을 보이고 있는 바, 누진성지수를 이용한 누진성 평가 연구에서는 곡선 교차 여부를 확인할 필요가 있다. 둘째 주제의 회귀분석 결과에 의하면 Suits지수는 총평균세율 및 Reynolds-Smolensky지수와 통계적으로 유의한 양의 관계를 갖는 반면 Gini계수와는 유의한 결과를 보이지 않는다. 그리고 경로분석 결과에 의하면, Gini계수는 총평균세율 및 Suits지수를 매개변수로 하여 Reynolds-Smolensky지수에 간접적인 영향을 미친다.

시니어 남성용 드레스폼 개발을 위한 정장착의 실태조사

도월희 ( Wolhee Do ),최은희 ( Eunhee Choi ) 한국의류산업학회 2018 한국의류산업학회지 Vol.20 No.3

This research used a questionnaire to provide basic data for the design of dressing form that enables the manufacture of senior menswear with an improved fit to match the dissatisfaction with the fit of male suits over the 50s. We used 132 questionnaires as analytical data. The results were: The item ‘purchasing method of formal suits’ showed that 95.5% purchased ready-to-wear jackets. The ‘abdominal obesity type’ and ‘trunk waist type’ had a high frequency of ‘complaints about the size of the ready-to-wear jacket’. They choose their suits and wear them directly from the store. It is expected that senior males will complain about ready-to-wear formal suits due to the increase in girth item than normal type due to change of body shape since they consider size to also be important when purchasing suits. The most important part of the body when purchasing suits is the shoulder area, followed by the front width and back width of the fit. As for the degree of recognition of suit size, 38.1% said that they know the size and ‘Suit size is hard to understand’. As a result of dissatisfaction with formal dressing, the items of ‘Neck wide of get loose’, ‘Drag line of back neck’, ‘Not fit of front opening’, ‘Not fit of shoulder slope’ and ‘dissatisfaction’. Therefore, it is salient to establish suit fitting system and size system for senior men.

다중대표소송의 입법화에 관한 연구

이훈종 ( Hun Jong Lee ) 한국법정책학회 2013 법과 정책연구 Vol.13 No.3

A multiple derivative suit is a representative lawsuit brought by a shareholder, not against the company that issued the stocks he owns, but against the members of board of directors of a subsidiary company or a sub-subsidiary, sub-sub-subsidiary, etc. The Korean Supreme Court dismissed the double derivative suit of the plaintiff on the grounds that the shareholder of the controlling company lacks standing to sue, but various arguments have been put forth on legalization of double derivative suits. There are cases where both the parent and the subsidiary companies do not hold the representative director of the subsidiary company to account despite his embezzling of subsidiary company assets. The minority shareholders of the parent company can file a representative suit against the representative director of the parent company for damages suffered by the parent company. However, when the representative director of the parent company does not have resources to pay for damages, or when it is difficult to assess damages suffered by the parent company, it is necessary to allow a double derivative suit by the minority shareholders of the parent company against the representative director of the subsidiary company. Applying a similar logic, it necessary to recognize a triple derivative suit as well as a quadruple derivative suit, etc. In this paper, we propose a concrete legislative theory, after reviewing the cases where a multiple derivative suit is recognized for a consecutive parent-subsidiary relationship. There is a question of who is allowed to file a multiple derivative suit. Can a sole shareholder bring suit? Can minority shareholders who own more than one-hundredth of the total number of issued shares (Article 403 of the Commercial Law) bring suit? If we allow a multiple derivative suit on account of protecting economic interests of the suing shareholders, it is reasonable to recognize the standing to sue of minority shareholders of the parent company. There is a problem as to what extent the multiple derivative suit should be recognized. Should only single derivative suits be recognized? Should triple derivative suits also be recognized? Should quadruple derivative suits be? Are we to recognize them as long as there is a chain of parent-subsidiary relationship? For example, if the percentages of ownership of the shareholders who brought the multiple derivative suit are equal, and the amounts that the subsidiary or sub-subsidiary company will gain after winning the case are equal, the financial profit gained by the shareholders of the parent company for winning a triple derivative suit exceeds one half of the financial profit gained for winning a double derivative suit. Thus, it can be said that there is not much difference in the financial profit gained by the shareholders whether it is the subsidiary, the sub-subsidiary, or the sub-sub-subsidiary who receives compensation for damages by winning a multiple derivative suit. Hence, with consecutive parent-subsidiary relationships, it is reasonable allow bringing multiple derivative suits, regardless of whether it is the subsidiary, the sub-subsidiary, or the sub-sub-subsidiary who receives compensation for damages.

DEVELOPMENT OF HAND-MADE SUITS SYSTEM USING THE 2D IMAGE DATA OF HUMAN BODY

Kihyun Kim,Kwangtae Kim,Hyunwoo Park,Donghoon Lee,Taesoo Yun 한국멀티미디어학회 2007 한국멀티미디어학회 국제학술대회 Vol.2007 No.-

In this paper, we propose a system of hand-made suits using the 2D image data of the human body. Among the methods for measuring human body data, the methods use a 3D scanner. It is able to acquire exact measurements, but it is hard to purchase because of its high expenditure at a shop of hand-made suits. Also exact measurement which acquires to use a 3D Scanner is useful, when it produces tight clothing, On the other hand, hand-made suits don't require it, because it is produced to make up for physical weak points like drooping shoulders, bending back, bulging belly, etc. with using it for the gap between the body and suits. When it produces hand-made suits, the customer puts on direct to completing hand-made suits requires making for long time, because it pass many process. To solve these problems, we propose a system that it acquires body size measurement using data from a 2D image of the body and a 2D human template model, and it is able to preview hand-made suits that will be completed. This system is a necessary technique that is required in the industry. and it will be generally used in various fields that need the measurements of the body size, and dresses concerning virtual clothing.

이사에 대한 주주의 직접소송과 대표소송의 구별 기준 - 델라웨어주 판례법을 중심으로 -

임정윤 한국상사법학회 2024 상사법연구 Vol.43 No.2

주주가 이사를 상대로 손해의 배상을 청구할 수 있는 수단은 크게 상법 제401조에 근거한 직접소송과 상법 제403조에 근거한 대표소송으로 구분된다. 그런데 직접소송과 대표소송의 각 대상이 되는 주주의 손해와 관련하여, 학계에서는 견해의 대립이 있으나 주주의 간접손해도 직접소송의 대상이 될 수 있다는 견해가 다수설이며, 판례는 주주의 직접손해는 직접소송의 대상이 되고, 간접손해는 대표소송의 대상이 된다고 구분하고 있다. 그런데 직접손해와 간접손해의 구체적인 구별 기준에 대하여는 아직까지 많은 논의가 이루어지지 않은 상황이다. 이사에 대한 책임추궁 수단으로서 주주의 직접소송과 대표소송 사이의 구별 기준과 관련하여는 미국의 회사 설립지로 각광받고 있는 델라웨어주의 판례법이 중요한 참고가 될 수 있다. 델라웨어주 대법원은 2004년 Tooley v. Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, Inc. 판결에서 ① 손해를 입은 당사자와 ② 구제를 받는 당사자라는 간단한 2가지 요소로 구성된 판단기준을 제시하였는데, 이에 따르면 불공정한 신주발행으로 인한 주식 희석화에 따른 주주의 청구권은 파생적 청구권으로, 대표소송의 대상으로 분류되었다. 그런데 얼마 지나지 않은 2006년 Gentile v. Rossette 판결에서 지배주주와 소수주주 사이의 이해상충으로 인한 주식의 경제적 가치와 의결권의 부당한 편취가 있는 경우에는 주주의 직접손해를 인정하여 직접소송을 허용하고, 이후에는 이러한 예외를 확장하는 판결과 축소하는 판결이 공존하면서 법적 안정성이 저해되었다. 이에 델라웨어주 대법원은 2021년 Brookfield Asset Management, Inc. v. Rosson 판결을 통해 Gentile v. Rossette 판결의 선례를 변경함으로써 위와 같은 예외를 더 이상 적용하지 않겠다고 선언하였고, Tooley 기준의 원칙을 재확인하였으며, 다만 지배권 변동 등 예외적인 경우에는 주주의 직접소송이 인정된다고 판시하였다. 위와 같은 델라웨어주의 판례법은 우리나라의 주주소송 법리와 현재 진행 중인 이사의 충실의무 확대 논의에서도 의미를 가질 수 있다. 불공정한 신주발행 등 주식의 희석화가 문제되는 사안에서 주주들 사이의 이해상충이 있거나 이사가 특정 주주의 이익을 위하여 행위한 경우라도 델라웨어주 판례법은 개별 주주의 이사에 대한 직접적인 손해배상청구를 허용하지 않으며, 이는 델라웨어주에서 이사의 주주에 대한 충실의무를 인정하면서도 그 의무 위반에 대한 주주의 직접적인 청구권 행사를 허용하지 않는 결과가 된다. 다만 델라웨어주와 우리나라의 회사법 간에 주주대표소송의 실효성, 그리고 법인격부인 법리의 인정 가능성 등에 관한 차이를 고려하였을 때, 우리나라에서는 폐쇄회사 등 특별한 사정이 있는 경우에 한하여 상법 제401조에 의한 주주의 이사에 대한 직접적인 손해배상청구를 허용할 필요가 있다고 생각된다. The means by which a shareholder can claim damages against a director can be broadly classified into direct suits based on Article 401 of the Commercial Act and derivative suits based on Article 403 of the Commercial Act. Regarding the damages suffered by shareholders that can be the respective subjects of direct and derivative suits, there is a divergence of opinions in academia. The prevailing view is that indirect injury to shareholders can also be the subject of a direct suit, while case law distinguishes that direct injury to shareholders can be claimed through a direct suit, while indirect injury can be claimed through a derivative lawsuit. However, there has not yet been much discussion on the specific criteria for distinguishing between direct and indirect injury. Regarding the criteria for distinguishing between direct and derivative suits as means for holding directors accountable, the case law of Delaware, which is highly regarded as a place for company incorporation in the United States, can be an important reference. In the 2004 Tooley v. Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, Inc. decision, the Delaware Supreme Court presented a simple two-part test consisting of: (1) who suffered the harm, and (2) who would receive the remedy. According to this Tooley test, a shareholderʼs claim due to dilution of shares from an unfair issuance of new shares is classified as a derivative claim and thus subject to a derivative suit. However, in the 2006 Gentile v. Rossette decision, it was recognized that in cases of expropriation of the economic value and voting rights of shares due to conflicts of interest between controlling and minority shareholders, direct injury to shareholders is acknowledged, allowing for direct suits. Subsequent conflicting rulings expanded and limited this exception, undermining legal stability. In the 2021 Brookfield Asset Management, Inc. v. Rosson decision, the Delaware Supreme Court changed the precedent set by Gentile v. Rossette, declaring that the exception would no longer apply and reaffirming the Tooley test principles. However, it also ruled that in exceptional cases, such as change of control, direct suits by shareholders would be allowed. Delaware case law can be meaningful in discussions of shareholder litigation principles and the expansion of directorsʼ duty of loyalty currently ongoing in Korea. Even in cases where share dilution due to unfair issuance of new shares is at issue, and there is a conflict of interest among shareholders or where directors act for the benefit of specific shareholders, Delaware case law does not permit individual shareholders to directly claim damages from directors. This results in Delaware recognizing directorsʼ duty of loyalty to shareholders while not allowing shareholders to directly exercise claims for breach of these duties. However, considering differences between Delaware and Korean corporate law regarding the effectiveness of derivative lawsuits and the extent to which courts pierce the corporate veil, it may be necessary in Korea to allow direct claims for damages by shareholders against directors under Article 401 of the Commercial Act in special circumstances, such as in close corporations.