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

      이사회의 권한에 관한 주주간 계약의 논점―대표이사 선임에 관한 주주간 계약의 채권적 효력을 중심으로― = The Validity of Shareholders’ Agreements Regarding the Authority of the Board of Directors ― focusing on the Appointment of a Representative Director―

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A109548950

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      Recent lower court decision(Seoul Central District Court, 2014kahap21391) has emerged addressing the validity of the so-called “procure clause” agreed upon by shareholders regarding the appointment of a representative director. The procure clause refers to a provision in a shareholders' agreement where shareholders agree on matters related to the execution of duties by the board of directors or the exercise of voting rights as directors. The parties to a shareholders' agreement are shareholders, but the agreement stipulates certain actions or duties to be performed by the board of directors or directors, rather than the shareholders themselves who are the contracting parties. Thus, unlike shareholders' voting agreements, this type of agreement assumes a distinction between the contracting party (the shareholder) and the acting party (the directors or the board). Since the purpose of the clause can only be realized through the actions of a third party, enforcing and implementing such provisions may prove more challenging than enforcing voting agreements between shareholders. Moreover, under the Korean Commercial Code, it raises the issue of whether such agreements, which pertain to matters beyond a shareholder's authority, have obligatory legal effect. In a recent preliminary injunction case, the lower court dismissed the applicant's request, on the grounds that the applicant lacked a sufficient legal interest. This article examines the validity of a shareholders' agreement where shareholders make an agreement concerning the authority of the board of directors. It highlights issues such as whether a director appointed by the shareholder is obligated to comply with such an agreement, and whether following the shareholder's instructions could constitute a breach of the director's duty of care and loyalty to the company.
      번역하기

      Recent lower court decision(Seoul Central District Court, 2014kahap21391) has emerged addressing the validity of the so-called “procure clause” agreed upon by shareholders regarding the appointment of a representative director. The procure clause ...

      Recent lower court decision(Seoul Central District Court, 2014kahap21391) has emerged addressing the validity of the so-called “procure clause” agreed upon by shareholders regarding the appointment of a representative director. The procure clause refers to a provision in a shareholders' agreement where shareholders agree on matters related to the execution of duties by the board of directors or the exercise of voting rights as directors. The parties to a shareholders' agreement are shareholders, but the agreement stipulates certain actions or duties to be performed by the board of directors or directors, rather than the shareholders themselves who are the contracting parties. Thus, unlike shareholders' voting agreements, this type of agreement assumes a distinction between the contracting party (the shareholder) and the acting party (the directors or the board). Since the purpose of the clause can only be realized through the actions of a third party, enforcing and implementing such provisions may prove more challenging than enforcing voting agreements between shareholders. Moreover, under the Korean Commercial Code, it raises the issue of whether such agreements, which pertain to matters beyond a shareholder's authority, have obligatory legal effect. In a recent preliminary injunction case, the lower court dismissed the applicant's request, on the grounds that the applicant lacked a sufficient legal interest. This article examines the validity of a shareholders' agreement where shareholders make an agreement concerning the authority of the board of directors. It highlights issues such as whether a director appointed by the shareholder is obligated to comply with such an agreement, and whether following the shareholder's instructions could constitute a breach of the director's duty of care and loyalty to the company.

      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

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼