RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      주주대표소송에 관한 소고-상법과 영국의 회사법제와의 비교를 중심으로- = A Study on Derivative Suits -Comparison between Korea’s Commercial Act and the UK’s Company Act -

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A101613256

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      According to Article 403 of Korea’s Commercial Act, a minority shareholder may file a shareholder derivative suit on behalf of a corporation against one or more of the corporation’s directors to hold them accountable for their negligent or intentional misconduct in case the organization fails to do so. This concept of a derivative suit, as adopted in Korea, originates from the “equitable principles” of Britain. In the early 19th century, the Courts of Equity of England intervened in numerous internal conflicts of corporations on the basis of trust law principles and later established the Derivative Suit as a legal system that allowed the shareholders of a company to file a lawsuit on their own against the company's directors.
      Later, the USA also adopted this system as a vital part of its corporate law.
      Considering that a derivative suit works as a legal device that can protect the interests of both a corporation and its shareholders, it appears meaningful to look closely at the systems as adopted both in Korea and the UK. It is from this perspective that this study analyzes and compares the UK's Company Act of 2006 and Korea's Commercial Act with a focus on the derivative suit system including the kinds of misconducts for which the shareholders may hold the directors accountable and theprocedures that have to be undertaken to file a derivative suit.
      The study concludes that the Korean form of derivative suit is more effective than that of the UK in protecting the public rights of shareholders and preventing the abuse of suit-filing, both of which should be regarded as its highly critical functions.
      번역하기

      According to Article 403 of Korea’s Commercial Act, a minority shareholder may file a shareholder derivative suit on behalf of a corporation against one or more of the corporation’s directors to hold them accountable for their negligent or intenti...

      According to Article 403 of Korea’s Commercial Act, a minority shareholder may file a shareholder derivative suit on behalf of a corporation against one or more of the corporation’s directors to hold them accountable for their negligent or intentional misconduct in case the organization fails to do so. This concept of a derivative suit, as adopted in Korea, originates from the “equitable principles” of Britain. In the early 19th century, the Courts of Equity of England intervened in numerous internal conflicts of corporations on the basis of trust law principles and later established the Derivative Suit as a legal system that allowed the shareholders of a company to file a lawsuit on their own against the company's directors.
      Later, the USA also adopted this system as a vital part of its corporate law.
      Considering that a derivative suit works as a legal device that can protect the interests of both a corporation and its shareholders, it appears meaningful to look closely at the systems as adopted both in Korea and the UK. It is from this perspective that this study analyzes and compares the UK's Company Act of 2006 and Korea's Commercial Act with a focus on the derivative suit system including the kinds of misconducts for which the shareholders may hold the directors accountable and theprocedures that have to be undertaken to file a derivative suit.
      The study concludes that the Korean form of derivative suit is more effective than that of the UK in protecting the public rights of shareholders and preventing the abuse of suit-filing, both of which should be regarded as its highly critical functions.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 이철송, "회사법강의 제18판" 박영사 2010

      2 홍복기, "회사법강의" 법문사 2006

      3 안택식, "회사법강의" 형설출판사 2009

      4 최준선, "회사법" 삼영사 2009

      5 김정호, "회사법" 법문사 2010

      6 정동윤, "회사법" 박영사 2003

      7 권기범, "현대회사법론" 삼지원 2010

      8 김대연, "지배종속회사에서의 대표소송" 19 (19): 2000

      9 임재연, "증권거래법" 박영사 2007

      10 김상규, "주주의 대표소송에 관한 소고 -당사자를 중심으로-" 법학연구소 25 (25): 177-196, 2008

      1 이철송, "회사법강의 제18판" 박영사 2010

      2 홍복기, "회사법강의" 법문사 2006

      3 안택식, "회사법강의" 형설출판사 2009

      4 최준선, "회사법" 삼영사 2009

      5 김정호, "회사법" 법문사 2010

      6 정동윤, "회사법" 박영사 2003

      7 권기범, "현대회사법론" 삼지원 2010

      8 김대연, "지배종속회사에서의 대표소송" 19 (19): 2000

      9 임재연, "증권거래법" 박영사 2007

      10 김상규, "주주의 대표소송에 관한 소고 -당사자를 중심으로-" 법학연구소 25 (25): 177-196, 2008

      11 안성포, "주주의 대표소송과 원고적격성" 12 (12): 2005

      12 민형기, "주주의 대표소송" 38 : 1987

      13 김홍기, "주주대표소송 판례의 동향과 그 연구" 법학연구소 48 (48): 1079-1104, 2007

      14 오성근, "영국의 회사법제상 이사의 의무 및 입법적 효용성" 한국상사법학회 27 (27): 39-88, 2008

      15 이중기, "영국법상 그림자이사(shadow directors)와 법인이사(corporate director): 재벌의 규제에 어떻게 이용될 수 있는가?" 15 (15): 1996

      16 최기원, "신회사법론" 박영사 2005

      17 이시윤, "신민사소송법" 박영사 2004

      18 정희철, "상법학(상)" 박영사 1989

      19 정찬형, "상법강의(상)" 박영사 2010

      20 서돈각, "상법강의(상)" 법문사 1999

      21 강위두, "상법강의(상)" 형설출판사 2006

      22 이병태, "상법(상)" 법원사 1988

      23 손주찬, "상법(상)" 박영사 2004

      24 강현중, "민사소송법" 박영사 2004

      25 이태종, "미국회사법상 이중대표소송" 2 : 1997

      26 심영, "英國 會社法 改正의 主要 內容과 그 示唆點" 중앙법학회 9 (9): 601-623, 2007

      27 송옥렬, "現行 商法上 二重代表訴訟의 許容 與否" 민사판례연구회 (28) : 528-554, 2006

      28 김영곤, "株主의 代表訴訟에 관한 小考" 한국기업법학회 11 : 9-31, 2002

      29 권재열, "二重代表訴訟의 許否에 대한 比較法的 檢討- 서울고등법원 2003.8.22. 선고, 2002다13746 판결을 대상으로 하여 -" 한국비교사법학회 11 (11): 443-475, 2004

      30 Jennifer Payne, "“Clean Hands” in Derivative Actions" 61 : 76-, 2002

      31 Bert S. Prunty, "The Shareholders' Derivate Suit: Note on its Derivation" 32 : 980-, 1957

      32 A. J. Boyle, "The Minority Shareholder in Nineteenth Century: A Study in Anglo-American Legal History" 28 : 371-, 1965

      33 Andrew Keay, "Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed: An Analysis of the New Derivative An Analysis of the New Derivative Action under the Companies Act 2006" 124 : 469-, 2008

      34 J. Poole, "Shareholders Remedies-Corporate Wrongs and the Derivative Action" 99-, 1999

      35 Jennifer Payne, "Section 459-461 Companies Act 1985 in Flux: The Future of Shareholder Protection" 64 : 647-, 2005

      36 Martha Bruce FCIS, "Rights and Duties of Directors" Tottel Publishing 2009

      37 Victor Joffe, "Minority shareholders: law, practice and procedure" Butterworths 2008

      38 Joan Loughrey, "Legal Practitioners, Enlightened Shareholder Value and the Shaping of Corporate Governance" 8 : 79-, 2008

      39 Arad Reisberg, "Derivative Claims under the Companies Act 2006-Much A do about Nothing?" 17-, 2009

      40 Alan Dignam, "Company Law" OUP 2009

      41 Stephen W. Mayson, "Company Law" OUP 2007

      42 Derek French, "Company Law" OUP 2008

      43 Andrew Hicks, "Cases & Materials on Company Law" OUP 2009

      44 "Analysis, Litigation Culture and New Statutory Derivative Claim 30 Co. Law"

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2026 평가예정 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2020-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2017-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
      2013-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2010-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2008-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2007-05-07 학술지명변경 외국어명 : 미등록 -> KOREAN COMMERCIAL LAW ASSOCIATION KCI등재
      2006-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2005-10-18 학술지등록 한글명 : 상사법연구
      외국어명 : 미등록
      KCI등재
      2004-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2001-07-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      1999-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 1 1 1.07
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.96 0.93 0.979 0.58
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼