증권집단소송의 도입과 증권거래법상 손해배상책임체계의 개선방안

李俊燮(Yi, Jun-Seob) 한국증권법학회 2003 증권법연구 Vol.4 No.2

자본시장법상 주식의 공동보유

이준섭(Yi, Jun Seob) 한국증권법학회 2014 증권법연구 Vol.15 No.2

공동보유의 개념은 1996년 증권거래법상 M&A 관련규정을 전면 개편하면서 5%룰과 공개매수의 규율을 위한 기초개념으로써 도입하였다. 공동보유는 공개매수의무와 5%룰의 보고의무가 발생되는 주식 등의 수를 산정함에 있어 합산의 대상이 되는 자를 파악하기 위한 개념이다. 그러나 우리 법상의 공동보유의 개념은 지나치게 추상적이고 포괄적으로 규정되어 있어 너무 쉽고 또한 넓게 공동보유자의 요건을 충족시키는 방향으로 법적용이 이루어지고 있다. 그러나 공동보유의 적용을 지나치게 넓게 인정하게 되는 경우에는 기업지배구조의 건전화 혹은 기업경영투명성을 향한 주주 혹은 투자자들의 건전한 협력행위를 방해하는 결과를 낳을 수 있다. 다른 한편 이 제도가 도입된 이래 17년이 지난 시점에서 볼 때 그동안 M&A 현실은 상당히 변화하였는데 법규정과 그의 적용이 변화하지 않은 채 그대로 유지되어 있는 것도 모순이다. 즉, 공동보유 개념의 중요한 전제조건 중의 하나가 강제공개매수제도인데 이 제도가 폐지된 현실에서 공동보유제도를 이토록 광범위하게 인정되는 것은 불합리하다. 따라서 우리의 법운용과는 달리 공동보유의 인정을 억제하는 방향으로 법을 운용하는 외국법과의 비교법적 고찰을 통하여 우리 법이 나아가야 할 길을 모색한다. The concept of “acting in concert” was introduced as basic regulatory instrument to supplement the 5% Rule and takeover-bids regulation in 1996, following the Securities Law amendments. Pursuant to an agreement or understanding (whether formal or informal), those act in concert do either actively cooperate or to vote in cooperation at the general meeting of the target company so that they obtain or consolidate control of a company by acquiring its shares. Acting in concert is governed under §142 enforcement ordinance of Korean Capital Market Code. When a tuned reciprocal behavior in relation to the target Company is approved as satisfying the requirements of acting in concert in an appointed case, it may lead to impose a duty to report in accordance with 5% rule and to make a mandatory offer. The concept of acting in concert, however, is so abstract broadly interpreted under the Korea law that it has been criticized for easily recognizing requirements of persons in acting in concert by the financial supervisory authority. Put it simple, acting in concert, in fact, breaches M&A related rules and has great influence on M&A game itself. At the same time, it has a negative impact on shareholders’ general activism which will contribute to development of a sound corporate culture as well as improvement of corporate governance and management transparency. By comparing Korean law and European law, this suggests that the requirement-provisions for acting in concert should be regulated more clearly and precisely by adding the supplementary conditions which restrict the wide scope of the existing regulations.

주제별 논단 : 금융산업의구조개선에관한법률 ; 부실금융기관 정리의 법적 문제점

이준섭 ( Jun Seob Yi ) 한국금융법학회 2005 金融法硏究 Vol.2 No.1

``The Act of Structural Improvement of the Financial Industry`` regulate the whole restructuring process of financial institutions generally. The Act has provisions on the decisions of insolvent financial institutions, prompt corrective actions, and other restructuring process which are also imposed by the order of Financial Supervisory Commission("FSC"). However, these regulations involve too many excessive impositions for the restructuring process of financial institutes by the FSC. These excessive dispositions and enforcements apply to all kinds of prompt corrective actions, for example, mergers, reduction of capital, P&A, etc., regardless of whether a financial institution is under insolvency or not. First of all, the exceptional regulations reduce the rights of stakeholders simply as well as shareholders of the related financial institutions. Even though the possibility of the reduction of the stakeholders`` rights under the exceptional crisis of related financial institutions may be opened, we may accept neither extraordinary orders of the financial supervisory administrator to the critical financial institutes nor excessive intervention into the normal institutions. Therefore this study emphasizes as a keypoint that the related provisons should be revised in the way that shareholders`` and stakeholders`` rights should be properly protected in harmony with efficient completion of the restructuring process.

주제별 논단 : 통합금융법 제정의 기본과제 ; 통합금융법 제정의 문제점과 과제: 증권분야를 중심으로

이준섭 ( Jun Seob Yi ) 한국금융법학회 2004 金融法硏究 Vol.1 No.1

Recently the Ministry of Finance and Economy announced that the financial Laws should be reformed and integrated by a function oriented approach. It means that in the future the same financial activities, which are operated by financial institutions in different financial sections, would be regulated in an consolidated Law. By now the korean financial system has been regulated by various financial Laws on the basis of differently separate financial sectors. The integration work was undertaken by the Financial Law Center at the Seoul National University and its draft may be modeled after the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 (FSMA 2000) of U.K. The Background of this movement could be somewhat understandable, from the viewpoint that traditional institution-oriented regulation over our financial system has failed in overcoming the discrimination and asymmetry of regulating standards among the each financial laws and even in realizing the effective financial supervision. Nevertheless the conception of the government to consolidate the different laws in one must result in failure and have various problems. Above of all it may lead to make a huge legal complex, which would be combined with coreless provisions of different financial laws, as well as the FSMA 2000 does. It could be successful in physical combination, but not chemical. The desirable figure of financial legal system in the future could be seen in acknowledging and accepting the differences and diversity between the regulating factors of different financial sectors. Therefore this paper propose that our financial regulation system should maintain the ``the rule of rational discrimination`in dealing with the consolidating the financial laws. In this regard the financial laws which are regulated on the basis of same regulating philosophy can be integrated in one legal system, however the other legal sectors should remain as itself. On the other hand as another proposal a constitution of horizontal supervisory system, which can subsume the borderless financial activities and fill up the vacuum of supervision, may be a substitution for the unreasonable governmental attempt.

감사 및 감사위원회의 운영실태에 관한 법적 분석

이준섭(Jun-Seob Yi),장정애(Jung-Ae Chang) 한국기업법학회 2011 企業法硏究 Vol.25 No.2

During the last decades, the auditing system has been one of the most crucial subject to improve the corporate governance in Commercial Law. After the economic crisis of IMF period, Commercial law adopted the “Audit Committee in US” in addition to the Auditor in two-tier system. However, due to the difference of the systems between the Auditor and Audit Committee, there are vague scopes, collision and overlap of duties between the board of directors and audit committee. Therefore, the relationship between the board of directors and audit committee should be defined and the scopes between the auditor and the audit committee should be clarified. On top of that, it all comes to how to operate the corporate auditing system appropriately no matter which system has been adopted. This Article has sought to explore the premises to operate the corporate auditing system appropriately, which are independence and expertise. For independence and expertise, auditors need the accurate information and assistances. Furthermore, this Article has suggested the status and improvement of corporate auditing system with the empirical analysis by the Korea Listed Companies Association. And the empirical analysis showed that the corporate auditing system is in lack of information and assistances, whether an auditing system or an audit committee. Also, the current Commercial law lacks measures ensuring independence of the auditing agency and the audit committee. To obtain the accurate information and assistances for being independence and expertise, as a general proposition, this Article proposes (1) Commercial law encourages all corporations to adopt an auditing system or an audit committee on its own choice. (2) the law should mandate all listed companies to adopt full-time auditor or full-time audit committee. (3) the law should mandate all listed companies to adopt subsidiary auditing mechanism.

주제별 논단 : 금융감독행정의 과제와 입법적 고찰 ; EU의 예금보장 및 투자자보상제도 -비교법적 고찰

이준섭 ( Jun Seob Yi ) 한국금융법학회 2004 金融法硏究 Vol.1 No.2

EU hat fruher schon die Notwendigkeit der Einlagensicherung und der Anlegerentschadigung als individual Schutz einerseits und Funktionsschutz des Finanzsystems andererseits erkennt. Nach den langjahrigen Disskussionen hat EUKommission die Einlagensicherungsrichtlinie im Jahr 1993 und die Anlegerentschadigungsrichtlinie im Jahr 1997 verabschiedet. Nun sind die beiden Richtlinien schon in alle nationalen Rechten umgesetzt worden. Ihr Ziel is nach den Erwagungsgruden beider Richtlinien es, die Einleger und Anleger im Falle der Zahlungsunfahigkeit sowohl des Kreditinstituts im engeren Sinne des 2. Bankenrechtrichtlinie als auch der Wertpapierfirma im Bereich des Nichtbanksektors zu schutzen und die aufgrund unterschiedlicher Systeme verzerrten Wettbewerbsbedingungen unter den EU-Mitgliedstaaten anzugleichen. Aus diesen Grundlagen sollen sie zugleich auch zur Stabilitat des ganzen Finanzsystems insgesamt beitragen. Daher betreffen beide Richtlinie fast alle Kreditinstituten und Wertpapierhausern einschliesslich des Investmentfonds. Der Kernpunkt der beiden Richtlinien besteht in der Verpflichtung der Mitgliedstaaten, in ihrem Hoheitgebiet fur die Errichtung und amtliche Anerkennung eines oder mehrerer Sicherungssysteme zu sorgen. Daneben auch ist die Zugehorigkeit zu diesen Systemen fur die Kreditinstituten und Wertpapierfirmen obligatorisch. Die Sicherungssysteme mussen tatig werden, sobald Einlagen oder Anlage nicht verfugbar werden. Fur diesen Fall sieht die beide Richtlinie vor, daß die Gesamtheit der Einlagen desselben Einlegers bis zu einem Betrag von 20000 ECU (Euro) abgedeckt wird. Solange der in einem Sicherungsfall auszahlende Betrag unterhalb des Mindestbetrags liegt, kann ein Selbstbehat von hochstens 10% vorgesehen werden. Einlagen als schutzgegenstand im Sinne der Einlagensicherungslichtlinie sind Guthaben, die sich aus auf einem Konto verbliebenen Betragen oder aus Zwischenpositionen im Rahemen von normalen Bankgeschaften ergeben und zuruckzuzahlen sind, sowie Forderungen, die das Kreditinstitut durch Ausstellung einer Urkunde verbrieft hat. Auch das Anlegerentschadigungssystem soll eintreten, wenn eine Wertpapierfirma nicht mehr in der Lage ist, die Gelder zuruckzuzahlen, die sie Anlegern im Zusammenhang mit Wertpapiergeschaften schuldet oder Wertpapiere oder andere Finanzinstrument zuruckzugeben, die Anlegern gehoren und die die Firma fur die Anleger verwahrt ode verwaltet. Hier sind die Rechtfiguren und Regelungsfaktoren des EU Einlagesicherungs- und Anlegerentschadigungssystems entsprechend mit koreanischem Einlagesicherungsrecht auf rechtvergleiche Weise untersucht worden.

監査人의 被監査會社에 대한 責任과 制限

이준섭 인천대학교 법학연구소 2001 仁川法學論叢 Vol.4 No.-

證券去來法의 爭點에 대한 입법론적 고찰

李俊燮 인천대학교 법학연구소 2000 仁川法學論叢 Vol.3 No.-

株主의 新株引受權 排除 : 정당화 요건을 중심으로

이준섭 한국상사법학회 1994 商事法硏究 Vol.13 No.-