기업지배구조 개선을 위한 최근의 상법상 변화

김광록,Kwang Rok Kim 한국비교사법학회 2014 비교사법 Vol.21 No.4

우리나라는 지난 1997년 소위 IMF 경제위기 이후 기업의 지배구조 개선을 위한 노력을 지속적으로 해 왔다. 이는 우리나라의 경제위기가 그간 우리나라 기업의 대표적 특성인 “재벌”들의 기업경영이 매우 불투명하게 이루어 져 온 것이 그 원인이라는 데에 큰 이견이 없었기 때문이다. 따라서 기업경영의 투명성과 소수주주의 권리 보호 등을 강화하는 것을 중심으로 하는 기업지배구조 개선의 노력은 지속되었고, 이러한 노력은 어느 정도 성공적인 결과를 나타내기도 하였다. 그러나 2008년 미국 발 세계경제 위기는 우리나라 기업환경의 변화를 더욱 강하게 요구하였으며, 우리나라는 기업지배구조의 국제적 정합성과 세계적 경향을 따르는 것은 물론 국내 경제 활성화를 위하여 지속적인 지배구조개선의 노력을 유지하여 왔다. 이러한 노력은 지난 2011년 대대적인 상법 개정을 통하여 그 성과를 나타낸 바 있으며, 가장 최근인 지난 2013년 7월 새로운 개정안을 제시하기도 하였다. 이렇듯 우리나라는 지난 1997년 말부터 지금까지 상법상 기업의 지배구조에 관한 변화를 요구하였고, 상법은 이 요구를 어느 정도 수용하면서 변화를 거듭하여 왔다. 따라서 이 논문은 기업의 지배구조의 전체적인 변화를 살펴보고 그 흐름에 따른 향후 개선 방안에 대하여 살펴보고자 한다. Recently endeavors for improving the corporate governance system has been continued all over the world. As for Korea, the economic crisis of the late 1997 was the turning point to the new era for improving Korean corporate governance. After the 1997 economic crisis, endeavors for betterment of Korean corporate governance, such as some new schemes for transparencies of corporate management and protective policies of minority shareholders, had been gradually increased, and these endeavors looked somewhat successful. However, the new world economic crisis in 2008 demanded Korean corporate circumstance new changes, the Korean government has continually tried to improve the corporate governance in order to catch up with the world’s consistency and international trend, and totally amended the Korean Commercial Code in 2011. Moreover, the Korean government, most recently, proposed to amend the Korean Commercial Code again in 2013 and this proposal included most controversial issues especially to Korean enterprises unlike some existed changes of Korean Commercial Code related to the Corporate governance in Korea by then. In the meanwhile, many studies and researches have focused on the detail subjects related to the Korean corporate governance whenever the Korean Commercial Code has been amended since the last economic crisis in 1997, but there are rare studies which screened the general amendments at large and examined the history of the changes of the corporate governance in Korea. Therefore, this article systematically examines the flow of changes for the betterment of Korean corporate governance since the economic crisis in 1997 and studies for the 2013 government’s proposals of amendment to the Korean Commercial Code. Through this article, the model of the corporate government standard to some other countries in the East Asia, especially to China could be established.

상표법에 의한 저작권보호의 미국판례 고찰

김광록 ( Kwang Rok Kim ) 한국상사판례학회 2005 상사판례연구 Vol.18 No.1

Copyright is a legal protection that covers published and unpublished literary, scientific and artistic works, and whatever the form of expression. Copyright gives the owner the exclusive right to reproduce, distribute, perform, display, or license his work. Copyright protects original work of authorship such as a picture, drawing, graphics, software program, written work, sculpture, song, or photograph, and so forth. Therefore copyright law prohibits copying another`s copyrighted work for any purpose, making things based on the copyrighted work, distributing copies of the copyrighted work, publicly performing the copyrighted work, displaying the copyrighted work, and in the case of sound recordings, transmitting the recording over the internet or in another media. Similarly, trademark includes any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination, used, or intended to be used, in commerce to identify and distinguish the goods of one manufacturer or seller from goods manufactured or sold by others, and to indicate the source of the goods. Therefore trademark law prohibits using another`s trademark on your merchandise, because such use will cause consumers to believe that the trademark owner has made, approved of, or endorsed your merchandise. However, it is said that the border of copyright and trademark has been blurred because the purpose of the copyright law and the trademark law is to protect the result of the human`s intellectual and mental works. Thus, it is also said when copyright is infringed the infringed copyright can be recovered not only by the copyright law but also by the trademark law. By the way, indeed can it be true as is said that trademark law truly protects copyright? Then we seriously need to think what is different the copyright law from the trademark law. This Review tried to find the answer to that kind of questions through the famous U.S. Supreme Court case, Dastar v. Twentieth Century Fox, [123 S. Ct. 2041; 156 L. Ed. 2d 18 (2003)]. This Review basically introduces and analyzes the U.S. case in order to find the way to balance the copyright law and the trademark law on the purpose of legislation of the both laws.

ESG 경영의 관점에서 본 미국의 우리사주제도

김광록(Kwang Rok Kim) 한국기업법학회 2021 企業法硏究 Vol.35 No.3

최근 우리나라는 물론 전세계적으로 ESG 경영이 핫 이슈로 떠오르면서 기업경영의 가장 중요한 핵심 주제가 되었다. ‘ESG’는 기업의 비재무적 요소인 환경(Environment), 사회(Social), 지배구조(Governance)의 영문 첫 글자를 딴 약어로서, 기업이 지속가능한 성장을 하기 위해서는 환경을 보호하고, 사회적 가치를 중요하게 생각하며, 투명하고 윤리적인 지배구조 개선을 실천해야 한다는 의미를 담고 있다. 이러한 사정에서 지금까지 우리나라의 ESG는 주로 대기업의 불투명한 지배구조나 총수 일가의 범죄 등의 이슈가 중점적으로 다루어지는 등 지배구조 분야에 관심이 집중되었던 것이 사실이다. 그러니까 굳이 말하자면 ESG 중에서 ‘G’ 분야의 문제에 집중되었다고 할 수 있다. 그러나 최근에는 지배구조인 (‘G’) 분야의 문제 뿐만아니라 환경 (‘E’)과 사회 (‘S’) 분야의 문제도 중요한 화두가 될 것이 분명하다. 물론 각 기업들은 기업가치의 제고 및 지속가능한 경영상 발전을 위하여 주로 재무적 관점에서 ESG에 대한 관심을 기울이고 있는 듯해 보인다. 그러나 사실상 기업에 있어 지속가능한 경영에 있어 가장 중요한 이해관계자를 생각할 때 해당기업에 종사하는 종업원을 빼놓을 수가 없음은 당연하다. 따라서 기업의 종업원이 자신이 속한 기업에 얼마나 충실하게 관여하느냐가 실질적으로 기업의 ESG 경영의 중요한 한 축이다. 굳이 말하자면 ESG에 있어서 ‘S’ 축을 종업원이 차지하고 있다고 해도 과언이 아닌 것이다. 이러한 측면에서 ESG 경영과 기업의 우리사주제도는 매우 중요한 관계에 있고, 기업의 성공적인 ESG 경영을 위해서는 우리사주제도에 대한 동반 성장이 반드시 필요하다고 할 것이다. 따라서 이글에서는 우리사주제도와 기업의 ESG 경영의 성공적인 발전 및 성장을 위하여 우리사주제도에 관한 기본적인 법적 구조와 법리를 살펴보고자 한다. 특히 우리사주제도의 태생지인 미국의 우리사주제도에 대해서 구체적으로 살펴봄으로써 우리나라 제도의 발전 방안을 모색해 보고자 한다. Recently, as ESG management has emerged as a hot issue not only in Korea but also worldwide, it has become the most important core issue of corporate management. “ESG” is an abbreviation of the first letters of the non-financial elements of a company: Environment, Social, and Governance. It considers it important and implies that transparent and ethical governance improvement should be practiced. Under these circumstances, it is true that Korea"s ESG management has been focused on the field of governance, mainly dealing with issues such as the opaque governance structure of large corporations, including so-called “Chaebols,” and the crimes of the head of large corporations. So, to put it bluntly, it can be said that the focus was on the problems of the ‘G’ field among ESGs. However, in recent years, it is clear that not only the issues of the governance structure (‘G’) but also the issues of the environment (‘E’) and society (‘S’) will become an important issue. Of course, each company seems to be paying at tention to ESG mainly from a financial point of view in order to enhance corporate value and achieve sustainable management development. However, in reality, when considering the most important stakeholder in sustainable management for a company, it is natural that the employees working in the company can’t be left out. Therefore, how faithfully a company"s employees are involved in the company to which they belong is actually an important axis of a company"s ESG management. In that, it would not be an exaggeration to say that employees occupy the ‘S’ axis in ESG. In this respect, ESG management and the employee stock ownership system of a company are very important, and it will be said that the mutual growth of the employee stock ownership plan is essential for a successful ESG management of a company. Therefore, this article would like to examine the basic legal structure and jurisprudence of the employee stock ownership plan for the successful development and growth of the employee stock ownership plan and corporate ESG management. In particular, by examining the US employee stock ownership plan, the birthplace of the employee stock ownership plan, in detail, the article would like to explore ways to develop the Korean employee stock ownership plan.

COMPARATIVE REVIEW OF THE ARBITRATION ACTS OF SOUTH & NORTH KOREAS WITH THE AGREEMENT ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COOPERATIVE COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

김광록(KWANG-ROK KIM) 한국비교사법학회 2005 比較私法 Vol.12 No.2

Recently North Korea has continuously caused serious turbulence to the international societies with such as an announcement of the withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and of holding the nuclear weapon. However, the North Korean government has gradually taken drastic economic measures in order to improve its economic management. The government revised even its Constitution and amended nine foreign business related laws under the new Constitution in order to induce foreign investments. It is true that North Korea has Constitution and all sorts of substantial and positive laws under its Constitution. Especially, as laws to solve disputes occurred from the civil affair, North Korea only had the Code of Civil Procedure of 1994 and the Arbitration Act of 1985 before the last revision of its Constitution in 1998. Until then, even though there were legal means to solve the disputes between business parties, it was almost impossible for foreign investors or foreign enterprises to use those laws because those laws' purposes are to protect North Korea's people and to solve their own problems concerning inner disputes occurred from them. After all, the North Korean government acknowledged these situations and revised Constitution to encourage establishment and management of foreign investment enterprises in 1998. Then, the North Korean government established the External Economic Arbitration Act (EEAA) in 1999. Actually, after the enactment of the EEAA, not only North Korea but also some foreign countries expect that the EEAA would activate business transactions between North Korea and foreign enterprises and induce foreign capitals. However, the South and the North discussed technical issues of providing an institutional guarantee for effecting North-South economic cooperation at the 3rd meeting of the North-South Arrangement-Making Panel for Economic Cooperation on October 11 and 12, 2003. As a result of the meeting the North and the South adopted an agreement on organizing and operating the North-South Committee for the Arbitration of Business Disputes according to the North-South Agreement on the Procedures for the Settlement of Business Disputes in order to settle the business disputes that occur from the transactions between North and South Korean entities. The North-South Agreement on the Procedures for the Settlement of Business Disputes was signed at the fourth round of the north-south ministerial talks closed on Dec. 16, 2000. The Agreement on the Procedures for the Settlement of Business Disputes came into effect from August 20, 2003. Even though the both sides adopted the agreement on the Cooperative Commercial Arbitration Committee, the committee has not been an effective legal entity because the both sides has not exchange the detail documents that are recognized by the each government. Therefore, all the parties who are engaged in the business disputes from the transactions between the North and South Korea still must follow the arbitration act of each side. Of course every foreign business firms who stay in North Korean area also need to observe the North Korean arbitration law. But the North Korean legal, social, and economic systems are quite different from that of capitalism. So all the people who want to make a transaction with North Korean firms must understand the North Korean legal system, including the arbitration system. This Article first examines the North Korean arbitration systems and introduces the Amendment to the Korean Arbitration Act (KAA) and the North Korean arbitration act (EEAA). And then, the Article analyzes the expected problems from the both acts. The Article also offers recommendations for improvement to the KAA and the EEAA where applicable. Further, the Article purports to provide the best understanding and confidence of the South and North Korean arbitration systems under the KAA and the EEAA to readers who might have a chance to use South and North Korea

바람직한 한ㆍ중 FTA 협상을 위한 한국 상표법의 주요 쟁점에 관한 소고

김광록(Kim, Kwang-Rok) 충북대학교 법학연구소 2013 法學硏究 Vol.24 No.1

지난 1992년 한국과 중국이 정식으로 수교를 맺은 이후, 이미 20년이 지났다. 그 동안 한ㆍ중 양국은 특히 경제적인 측면에서는 매우 비약적인 발전을 거듭하며 교류 및 협력관계를 지속적으로 발전시켜오고 있다. 한편, 2000년 중국의 한국에 대한 무역 총액은 345억 달러로서 이중 수출이 112.9억달러, 수입이 232.1억달러를 기록하였으나, 작년의 경우 교역 총액은 2,543.2억 달러로서 이중 수출이 876.5억달러, 수입이 1,666.6억달러에 이르러 매년 많게는 40%씩 증가하여 현재 한국은 중국의 4대 수출국이면서 최대 수입국으로서 최고의 경제교류 및 협력국의 지위를 갖게 되었다. 이렇듯 중국과 한국 양국의 교역량이 확대되어감에 따라 상호간에 FTA(Free Trade Agreement)체결을 위한 노력이 가시적으로 나타나기 시작하였으며, 2012년 말 한국의 경주에서 한ㆍ중 FTA를 위한 제4차 협상을 개최하기에 이르렀다. 현재 협상 중인 한ㆍ중 FTA는 지적재산권 관련 부문을 포함하여 협상을 진행할 것을 양국이 이미 합의한 상태이다. 따라서 이후 계속 진행될 양국간의 FTA 협상 시 지적재산권 관련부분은 매우 민감한 사안으로서 나타나게 될 것은 불 보듯 뻔한 사실이라고 할 것이다. 그런데 한국의 경우에는 2102년 3월 15일 한미 FTA가 발효되었으며, 이로 인하여 한국의 지적재산권 관련 부문 중 특허법, 실용신안법, 디자인보호법, 상표법, 저작권법, 부정경쟁방지법 등의 법률이 한미 FTA를 이행하기 위한 후속조치로서 이미 일부 개정되어 이들 개정법들은 2012년 3월 15일부터 이미 시행되고 있는 사정이다. 이 중에서 특히 상표법은 한미 FTA 이후 나타난 상표제도의 많은 변화들을 수용하기 위하여 큰 폭으로 개정될 수밖에 없었다. 결국 한ㆍ중 FTA 협상 시 한국 측에서 논의하게 되는 상표법 분야는 한미 FTA의 영향으로 개정된 현행 한국 상표법을 기준으로 이루어질 수밖에 없을 것이다. 이러한 점에서라도 현재 중국 상표법은 한국의 상표법은 일정 정도 차이를 나타내고 있다고 할 것이다. 따라서 이러한 의미에서라도 한ㆍ중 FTA 협상에 있어 현재 한국 상표법의 주요내용을 확인하는 것은 매우 뜻 깊은 일이라고 할 것이다. 따라서 이글에서는 한미 FTA 의 구체적인 상표법 관련 내용을 중심으로 현행 한국 상표법의 주요 내용에 대한 고찰 한다. The New Amendment of Korean Trademark Law has been effective since March 15, 2012 in order to adopt to the result of the Korea-US FTA, which has been effective on the same date when the New Amendment of Korean Trademark Law has been effective. Basically, the Korea-US FTA prescribes that either party may not require, as a condition of registration, that signs be visually perceptible, or deny registration of a trademark solely on the grounds that the sign of which it is composed is a sound or scent. Korea-US FTA also requires that each party shall provide that trademarks shall include certification marks and that geographical indications are eligible for protection as trademarks. Besides the Korea-US FTA provides that either party may not require recordation of trademark licenses to establish the validity of the license, to assert any rights in a trademark, or for other purposes. However, the old Korean Trademark Law did not include the contents that the Korea-US FTA prescribes as the above mentioned. Therefore, the New Amendment includes some new issues that the Korea-US FTA prescribes such as the protection for non-visual trademarks, which are the sound mark and scent mark, the certification mark system, the abrogation of requirement for the sole right of trademark use, and some other trademark protection issues. However, Korea and China agreed to negotiate for the Korea-China FTA, and declared the opening of the negotiation for the Korea-China FTA on May 02, 2012. Since the declaration the negotiations are held 5 times by now. The 5th negotiation was held in Harbin, China, in April 26~28, 2013. China is the largest international trade partner of Korea and Korea is the 4th largest trade partner of China. Thus, the Korea-China FTA will provides many changes and opportunities to both countries. By the way, Korea and China also agreed to include the issues of intellectual property matters, of course, including the matters of Tradesmark law, to the Korea-China FTA. In that, each country needs to examine the other country's trademark law during negotiation for the Korea-China FTA. However, The Korean Trademark Law has been newly amended, so examining the New Amendment of the Korean Trademark Law is more important comparing it to examining the Chinse Trademark Law at this moment. Therefore, this Article reviews on the primary issues of Korean Trademark Law from the perspective of Korea-China FTA negotiation.

상법상 항공운송인의 물건운송에 대한 손해배상책임 규정 검토

金洸祿(Kwang-Rok Kim) 한국기업법학회 2011 企業法硏究 Vol.25 No.4

After The Korean government enacted the Part VI of Korean Commercial Code(herein after as “KCC”) as the Part of the “Carriage by Air” and the enactment of the Part VI is effective from November 24, 2011. Even though the Korean government ratified the Montreal Convention of 1999(Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, Signed at Montreal on 28 May 1999) on September 20, 2007 that became effective from December 29, 2007, there have not been any laws or regulations applying to the domestic air carriers for damages of goods which are caused by domestic air transportations. Moreover, the volume of air cargo transportation in Korea has increased in recent years nevertheless the KTX(Korean high-speed railroad) has been tremendously developed and expanded its routes all over the country. Therefore, the needs for some laws or regulations on the domestic air carriage including air carriers" liability for damages of goods has been increased as well in Korea. Under this circumstance, the Korean government has seriously deliberated on the subject of the needs and finally decided to enact the Part of the “Domestic Carriage by Air Act” in the KCC. This Article examines the newly enacted provisions of the KCC, focusing on the Air Carrier"s Liability for Damages of Goods which mainly reflected the Montreal Convention. Through the examinations, this Article tries to suggest some betterments of the enactment of KCC as well.

증권집단소송의 최근 동향으로 본 증권관련집단소송법의 발전적 개선을 위한 제언

김광록 ( Kwang Rok Kim ) 한국상사판례학회 2013 상사판례연구 Vol.26 No.3

The Korean government enacted the Securities related Class Actions Law in order to seek a relief for collective injuries of investors, caused in the course of unjust trading securities, and to enhance the operational transparency of companies in Korea. However, it is true that when the government first announced the enactment of the Securities Related Class Action Law, many experts worried recklessly extravagant uses of securities class actions. Despite of this worries the Securities Related Class Action Law took in effect in 2005. Historically said that securities class action system was made and developed under the American economic circumstance which is the representative model of the formal capitalism. So Korea is the unique country which introduced the securities class action system to its own financial market among the OECD member countries excluding the U.S. and Canada. In that the Korean government should be very serious and studied many aspects of securities class action in order to make the system of the securities class action just fit to the Korean financial market. However, the Securities Related Class Action Law in Korea is not very fit it-selt to the Korean financial market. Because there are only 5 securities related class actions that have been brought before the court since the enactment of the Securities Related Class Action Law, in spire of the experts worries that the Securities Related Class Action Law would cause recklessly extravagant uses of securities class actions. This Article is basically to examine the present conditions of securities class action in the Korean financial market as well as those in the U.S. financial market. And the Article also introduces the Federal Civil Procedure Rule, Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act, Securities Litigation Uniform Standard Act, Sabanes-Oxley Act, and Class Action Fairness Act and studies the current trend of securities class action in the both countries in order to examines the reason why securities related class actions are not in use in Korean financial market. And the Article finally tries to make a proposition for the betterment of the Securities Related Class Action Law.

중국의 사외이사제도 발전을 위한 개선 방안에 관한 고찰

김광록(Kwang Rok Kim),양국평(Guoping Yang) 한국비교사법학회 2023 비교사법 Vol.30 No.3

미국 로스쿨에서의 실질적인 리걸 클리닉의 운영방법과 최근 동향

김광록(Kim, Kwang-Rok) 강원대학교 비교법학연구소 2013 江原法學 Vol.39 No.-

미국 로스쿨에서는 학생들로 하여금 법조인이 갖추어야 할 전문 기술을 효과적으로 체득할 수 있도록 다양한 실무교육을 실시하고 있다. 특히 최근에는 대부분의 로스쿨에서 과거 실무교육을 대표했던 리걸 클리닉 이외에 소위 익스턴쉽(Externships)을 포함하는 보다 확장된 실무교육을 실시하는 경향이 매우 우세하게 나타나고 있다. 결국 로스쿨에서의 실무교육은 단순히 소송기술이나 판례의 태도가 무엇인지 아는 것이 아니라 법적 추론능력과 사건의 해결 능력을 높임으로써 복잡다기한 법적분쟁을 전문적, 효율적으로 처리할 수 있는 능력을 함양하는데 중점을 두고 있다고 할 것이다. 한편 이제 제2기 졸업생 배출을 앞두고 있는 우리나라 로스쿨에서의 실무교육이 효과적이고도 안정적으로 이루어질 수 있도록 하기 위해서는 많은 시행착오가 예상된다. 따라서 이 글은 이러한 시행착오를 어느 정도는 줄여 나가기 위하여 우리나라 로스쿨의 모태라고 할 수 있는 미국 로스쿨에서의 실무교육의 운영방법 및 그 최근 동향을 살펴보고자 한다. Since 2009, th first year of the new era of legal education in Korea, the Korean law schools have improved many aspects of educational and administrative matters. However, it was very hard to set up and settle down the legal clinics of law schools at the very first step of Korean law school era, because the substantial education of legal clinic started not from 2009, the first year of law schools, but from 2011, or at least 2010, since the curriculum of legal clinic is not for the first year law students. It is the time to perfectly set up the legal clinic of Korean law schools, however, it is still very hard to make it up. Therefore it is very important to look at the legal clinic in the U.S. law schools since the Korean law school system was just introduced from the U.S. law school system. This article introduces the notion of legal clinic in the U.S. law schools and provides the substantial methods of its’ operation. The article also examines the recent tendency of legal clinic in the U.S. law school in order for the Korean law schools to set it up right.

자동차손해배상보장법(自動車損害賠償保障法)상 법인(法人) 대표자(代表者)의 타인성(他人性)에 관한 판례연구 (대법원 2006.8.25선고 2006다3263판결)

김광록 ( Kwang Rok Kim ),조규성 ( Gyu Seong Cho ) 한국상사판례학회 2007 상사판례연구 Vol.20 No.3