채무자회생법상 국제도산절차의 효력에 관한 입법적 과제 = A Study on the Legislative Policy of the Effect of Insolvency Proceedings under the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act of Korea

국문 초록 (Abstract)

종래 우리나라는 국제도산에 관하여 오랫동안 엄격한 속지주의를 취하고 있었다. 이는 우리 법원의 외국법원의 도산절차에 대한 종속을 거부하고, 국내사법권을 보호하고자 했던 입법정책에 기인한 것이었다. 그러나 2005년을 기점으로 채무자회생법을 제정하여 국제도산편을 신설하면서 입법방식의 체제정비를 시행하였다. 채무자회생법 제5편의 국제도산은 구 도산법상의 극단적 속지주의 규정들을 전면적으로 삭제하였고, 모델법의 수정 보편주의를 입법주의로 채택하였다. 다만 채무자회생법은 그 입법정책상의 이유로 모델법상의 취지가 배제되거나 또는 반영되지 않은 측면도 있다. 예컨대, 외국도산절차의 주종을 구별하지 않고, 외국도산절차 승인의 효력부분에서 그 자동적 효력을 인정하지 않는다. 또한 외국도산관재인이 국내도산절차를 개시신청하거나 참가하는 경우 해당 외국절차의 승인을 요구함으로써 그 접근권을 제한하고 있다. 문제는 채무자회생법의 이러한 태도가 모델법을 수용한 입법적 함의를 크게 손상시키고 있다는 점이다. 이에 본 글에서는 국제도산의 입법주의 이론들을 재검토하고, 이를 기초로 우리법의 국제도산절차의 효력에 관한 입법정책적 함의를 밝혀보고자 하였다. 본 논문에서는 우리법상 잔재된 속지주의적 입법정책을 버리고, 모델법을 재조명하여 국제적 조류에 동참할 것을 기대하며 다음과 같은 개정검토사항을 제안하였다. 즉, 채무자회생법상 ① 외국주절차와 외국종절차를 구분하고 정의규정을 마련하는 사항, ② 외국도산절차의 승인결정에 자동적 효력을 부과하는 사항, ③ 외국도산관재인의 국내도산절차 접근권에 외국절차의 사전승인을 폐지하는 사항 등을 반드시 재검토되어야 한다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper introduces international the legal frame work of international insolvency law, especially the effect of insolvency proceedings. By analyzing theories of cross-border insolvency law legislation, the paper proposes that international suitability and global fitness in international insolvency regime in Korea. Generally, cross-border insolvency cases can involve either a single case where the debtor`s assets are located in multiple jurisdictions or the insolvency of multiple members of a cross-border group resulting in concurrent insolvency proceedings in multiple jurisdictions. Also, insolvency within multinational enterprise groups raises complex issues due to the foreign elements of the case and the multiplicity of debtors. In order to determine the reasons for the complexity and problems in the matter of cross-border insolvency, it might be helpful to clarify the different approaches of countries to insolvency proceedings. Historically, the territorialism and universalism approaches are the main labels used to describe the approaches employed in dealing with cross-border insolvency. The territorialism in international insolvency suggests that the effects of insolvency proceedings should be confined to such property as is located within the territorial jurisdiction of the country in which the proceedings are opened. By contrast, the universalism invoke a universal effect to insolvency proceedings. The universalism refers to a system in which a single insolvency court controls the administration of the debtor`s assets and makes the distribution to creditors worldwide. Although the universalism is a widely held approach among the scholars in the cross-border insolvency field, this approach realize the difficulty in putting such a regime into practice in the field. Hence the current goal of international level is to design an interim solution which is the modified universalism. UNCITRAL Model Law (1997) adopted the modified universalism, and it has been adopted in Japan (2001), United States (2005), United Kingdom (2007) and so on. In Korea, from 2006, the new era of insolvency law governing international insolvency began. The previous three bankruptcy laws - Bankruptcy Act, Composition Act, and Corporate Reorganization Act - have been merged into, and were replaced by, the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act of Korea (DRBAK). One of the most important changes on the Act is the introduction of modified universalism of an international insolvency part by adopting the UNCITRAL Model Law. Although Korea established new modified universalism system with respect to international insolvency problems, the research and the study of effects and values of new system is still necessary.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김형두, "한국 국제도산법의 발전방향, In 국제거래법연구" 국제거래법학회 2001

2 임치용, "파산법연구3" 박영사 2010

3 임치용, "파산법연구2" 박영사 2006

4 임치용, "파산법연구" 2004

5 석광현, "통합도산법시안 중 국제도산법에 관한 의견"

6 박승두, "통합도산법 분석"

7 석광현, "채무자회생 및 파산에 관한 법률(이른바 통합도산법)에 따른 국제도산법의 개관" 한국민사소송법학회 10 (10): 326-366, 2006

8 林治龍, "외국파산절차가 국내에 미치는 영향" 한국법학원 37 (37): 173-199, 2004

9 임채웅, "외국도산절차가 국내에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구" 법원도서관 82 : 1999

10 박준, "국제적 회사정리를 둘러싼 제문제, In 민사판례연구(ⅩⅥ)" 박영사 1994

11 석광현, "국제사법과 국제소송-제3권" 박영사 2004

12 석광현, "국제도산법에 관한 연구-입법론을 중심으로" 법무부 2001

13 최준선, "국제거래법(제5판)" 삼영사 2005

14 金載亨, "統合 倒産法案의 主要爭點" 한국비교사법학회 10 (10): 38-76, 2003

15 深山卓也, "新しい国際倒産法制" 金融財政事情研究会 2001

16 山本和彦, "国際倒産法制" 商事法務 2002

17 山本和彦, "国際倒産の立法論的課題" 有斐閣 (1111) : 1997

18 石黒一憲, "国際倒産 vs. 国際課税 - 抵触法的考察" 信山社 2010

19 Edward J. Janger, "Universal Proceduralism" 32 : 819-, 2007

20 Kevin J. Beckering, "United States Cross-Border Corporate Insolvency: The Impact of Chapter 15 on Comity and the New Legal Environment" 14 : 281-, 2008

21 한충수, "UNCITRAL의 국제도산절차 Model Law 연구 -외국도산절차의 승인 및 집행을 중심으로" 한국민사소송법학회 7 (7): 526-568, 2003

22 Jenny Clift, "The UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency: A Legislative Framework to Facilitate Coordination and Cooperation in Cross-Border Insolvency" 12 : 307-, 2004

23 Teresa A. Sullivan, "The Persistence of Local Legal Culture: Twenty Years of Experience From the Federal Bankruptcy Courts" 17 : 801-, 1994

24 John J. Chung, "The New Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code: A Step Toward Erosion of National Sovereignty" 27 : 89-, 2007

25 Jully Pae, "The EU Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings: the Need for a Modified Universal Approach" 27 : 555-, 2004

26 Gabriel Moss, "The EC Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings: A Commentary and Annotated Guide" Oxford Univ. Press 2002

27 Lynn M. LoPucki, "The Case for Cooperative Territoriality in International Bankruptcy" 98 : 2216-, 2000

28 Robert K. Rasmussen, "Resolving Transnational Insolvencies Through Private Ordering" 98 : 2252-, 2000

29 Edward J. Janger, "Reciprocal Comity" 46 : 441-, 2011

30 Jay Lawrence Westbrook, "Multinational Enterprise in General Default: Chapter 15, The ALI Principles, and The EU Insolvency Regulations" 76 : 1-, 2002

31 Bob Wessels, "International Insolvency Law" Kluwer 2006

32 Samuel L. Bufford, "International Insolvency" Federal Judicial Center 2001

33 Jay Lawrence Westbrook, "International Arbitration and Multinational Insolvency" 29 : 635-, 2011

34 Samuel L. Bufford, "International Accord Included in the New Bankruptcy Law are Provisions Adopting the U.N. Model Law on International Insolvencies" 29 : 33-, 2006

35 Irit Mevorach, "Insolvency within Multinational Enterprise Groups" Oxford Univ. Press 2009

36 Ian F. Fletcher, "Insolvency In Private International Law" Oxford Univ. Press 2005

37 Kurt A. Mayr, "Enforcing Prepackaged Restructurings of Foreign Debtors under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code" 14 : 469-, 2006

38 Lynn M. LoPucki, "Cooperation in International Bankruptcy: A Post-Universalist Approach" 84 : 696-, 1999

39 Jay Lawrence Westbrook, "Chapter 15 At Last" 79 : 713-, 2005

40 Robert K. Rasmussen, "A New Approach To Transnational Insolvencies" 19 : 1-, 1997

41 Evelyn H. Biery, "A Look at Transnational Insolvencies and Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005" 47 : 23-, 2005

42 Jay Lawrence Westbrook, "A Global Solution to Multinational Default" 98 : 2276-, 2000

43 Jay Lawrence Westbrook, "A Comment on Universal Proceduralism" 48 : 503-, 2010