證券集團訴訟의 發生要因分析과 法的 對應課題 = Analysis on Securities Class Action Environment and Legal Strategic Responses

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The Securities Class Action Act took effect on January 1 2007 to all of the listed companies, which was firstly effective on January 1 2005 only to the large scaled listed companies above 2,000 billion won in assets. The Act was modelled after the US Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. One of the main purposes of the Act is to prevent the damaged investors from abusing the class action.
Nevertheless the class action can be easily arranged and taken under the current Act. The limitation of bringing a suit to three times within recent 3 years might not be enough to prevent from abusing the suit, as long as legal litigation causes are fulfilled. In suing damages by the reason of false or misleading disclosure in filling document, prospectus, or auditing report, the plaintiff has only to show that there have been only the illegal disclosure and the damages. In other words the plaintiff does not have to make evidence that he actually relied on the untrue disclosure. This is almost same in insider trading and manipulative actions.
This paper suggests two kinds of legal responses to prevent abusing a suit. First is concerned with corporate management strategies. All of the listed companies have to structure the internal control systems, special litigation committee and in-house legal counsel as well as enhancement of the corporate disclosure systems not to be the target of the class actions. Second is related to legislative concerns. A limitation is to be placed on the maximum of compensation to be given to the lawyers in charge of the actions, and the power to place a limit should be given to the judge. The proportionate liability system should be introduced to measuring the damages caused by misrepresentation in filing document, prospectus and auditing reports. The current out-of pocket measure system should be reasonably modified for measuring the actual damages in misrepresentation cases. Moreover as long as the internal control system of company had been effectively operated in relation to compliance, due care should be presumed to be already exercised, which means that the plaintiff have to prove that the defendant is in breach of duty of care, and the defendant(s) is(are) immune from the liability of damages. Lastly, in the perspectives of judicial policy the court should review the litigation requirements of the class action strictly and show the greater role in balancing the protection of corporate management and investors.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김정수, "현대증권법원론" 박영사 2002

2 전삼현, "허위공시관련 증권집단소송의 쟁점" 한국상사법학회 24 (24): 2006

3 박정우, "증권집단소송제에 따른 감리제도 개선방안에 관한 연구" 한국상사법학회 25 (25): 2006

4 최완진, "증권집단소송제도에 관한 법적 고찰-증권집단소송법의 문제점을 중심으로" 한국경영법률학회 16 (16): 2005

5 한석훈, "증권집단소송의 남소방지대책" 한국기업법학회 2004

6 임재연, "증권거래법" 박영사 2004

7 금융감독원, "외부감사대상회사 감사의견 분석-2005회계년도를 대상으로" 2006

8 송종준, "예측정보의 부실공시와 민사책임구조" 한국증권법학회 1 (1): 2000

9 금융감독위원회, "불공정거래 실태 분석 및 향후 감독방향" 2007

10 이상복, "미국의 증권집단소송제도에 관한 고찰" 한국경영법률학회 15 (15): 2004

11 최준선, "미국의 증권집단소송의 현황에 관한 소고" 한국기업법학회 2003

12 김성호, "미국 증권집단소송에서의 면책범위" 한국상사법학회 20 (20): 2002

13 김화진, "내부통제시스템의 법률적 의의와 정책적 인센티브, 「내부통제시스템의 구축방안 및 정책적 의의」(증권집단소송 이슈 시리즈 07), 전국경제인연합회, 2005.4"

14 김광록, "기업의 소송위험에 대한 대응책에 관한 연구" 한국기업법학회 19 (19): 2005

15 Adams C. Pritchard, "The Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 : The Sunset on California's Blue Sky Laws" 1998

16 Joel W. Sternman, "The Origins and Implications of the Joint and Several Liability and Proportionate Fault Provisions of ?1D of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 958 PLI/CORP. 757(1996)"

17 Edward J. Yodowitz, "Changing the Standard of Joint and Several Liability to a Proportionate Liability Rule" Abuses and Remedies 1994