RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    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
    KCI등재

    미국 증권집단소송의 최근 동향과 우리나라 증권관련집단소송법에 대한 시사점

    한글로보기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    After the financial crisis of the late 1997, the Korean government took a series of structural reform measures to improve the standards of financial system and to enhance the securities market. One major change was to enact the Securities related Class Actions Act that efficiently seeks a relief for collective injuries caused in the course of trading securities and ultimately to enhance the operational transparency of companies in Korea. Even thought this Act was in effective in 2005, the Act appled to some size of companies’ claim for compensation of loss incurred from the first activity after Jan. 2007.
    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.
    This Article is basically to examine the securities class action in the U.S. focused on 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. Also the Article studies the current trend of securities class action in the U.S. in order to compare it to that in the Korean financial Market. The Article finally tries to suggest the betterment of the Securities Related Class Action Act in Korea.
    번역하기

    After the financial crisis of the late 1997, the Korean government took a series of structural reform measures to improve the standards of financial system and to enhance the securities market. One major change was to enact the Securities related Clas...

    After the financial crisis of the late 1997, the Korean government took a series of structural reform measures to improve the standards of financial system and to enhance the securities market. One major change was to enact the Securities related Class Actions Act that efficiently seeks a relief for collective injuries caused in the course of trading securities and ultimately to enhance the operational transparency of companies in Korea. Even thought this Act was in effective in 2005, the Act appled to some size of companies’ claim for compensation of loss incurred from the first activity after Jan. 2007.
    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.
    This Article is basically to examine the securities class action in the U.S. focused on 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. Also the Article studies the current trend of securities class action in the U.S. in order to compare it to that in the Korean financial Market. The Article finally tries to suggest the betterment of the Securities Related Class Action Act in Korea.

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • Ⅰ. 머리말
    • Ⅱ. 미국의 증권집단소송
    • Ⅲ. 우리나라 증권관련 집단소송법
    • Ⅳ. 맺음말
    • 參考文獻
    • Ⅰ. 머리말
    • Ⅱ. 미국의 증권집단소송
    • Ⅲ. 우리나라 증권관련 집단소송법
    • Ⅳ. 맺음말
    • 參考文獻
    • 〈Abstract〉
    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 고인묵, "증권집단소송제도와 회계인프라의 정비방향"

    2 이준섭, "증권집단소송제-무엇이 문제인가: 남소문제와 그 대책" 전국경제인연합회 2004

    3 김광록, "증권집단소송의 이론과 실제" 자유기업원 2005

    4 이준섭, "증권관련집단소송제의 전제조건으로서의 손해배상책임제도의 정비방안" 2004

    5 이세인, "증권관련집단소송제도 운영에 관한 제안 -미국의 입법례 및 소송현황을 중심으로-" 한국기업법학회 19 (19): 379-402, 2005

    6 유병현, "증권관련집단소송법 제정안에 대한 검토" 한국상사법학회 20 (20): 2002

    7 법원행정처, "증권관련 집단소송규칙 해설"

    8 여현호, "증권 집단소송제 도입 미뤄질듯"

    9 이정환, "미국의 증권집단소송제도와 우리나라의 증권집단소송법제정에 관한 검토" 은기업지배구조연구소 7 : 2003

    10 조성훈, "미국 자본시장규제위원회 (CCMR) 중간보고서 주요내용 및 시사점" 한국증권연구원 2007

    1 고인묵, "증권집단소송제도와 회계인프라의 정비방향"

    2 이준섭, "증권집단소송제-무엇이 문제인가: 남소문제와 그 대책" 전국경제인연합회 2004

    3 김광록, "증권집단소송의 이론과 실제" 자유기업원 2005

    4 이준섭, "증권관련집단소송제의 전제조건으로서의 손해배상책임제도의 정비방안" 2004

    5 이세인, "증권관련집단소송제도 운영에 관한 제안 -미국의 입법례 및 소송현황을 중심으로-" 한국기업법학회 19 (19): 379-402, 2005

    6 유병현, "증권관련집단소송법 제정안에 대한 검토" 한국상사법학회 20 (20): 2002

    7 법원행정처, "증권관련 집단소송규칙 해설"

    8 여현호, "증권 집단소송제 도입 미뤄질듯"

    9 이정환, "미국의 증권집단소송제도와 우리나라의 증권집단소송법제정에 관한 검토" 은기업지배구조연구소 7 : 2003

    10 조성훈, "미국 자본시장규제위원회 (CCMR) 중간보고서 주요내용 및 시사점" 한국증권연구원 2007

    11 김광록, "기업의 소송위험에 대한 대응책에 관한 연구" 한국기업법학회 19 (19): 231-260, 2005

    12 최준선, "美國의 證券集團訴訟의 現況에 관한 小考" 한국기업법학회 12 : 441-456, 2003

    13 David M. Levine, "The Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998: The Sun Sets on California’s Blue Sky Laws" 54 : 1998

    14 Timothy K, Roake, "The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995" Fenwick & West LLP 1996

    15 Scott L. Nelson, "The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005: An Analysis" 2005

    16 Thomas D. Rowe, Jr., "State and Foreign Class-Action Rules and Statutes: Differences from and Lessons for Federal Rule 23" 35 (35): 2008

    17 Rodolfo Batiza, "Sources of the Field Civil Code : The Civil Law Influences on a Common Law Code" 60 : 799-, 1985

    18 Sherrie R. Savett, "Securities Class Actions since the 1995 Reform Act : A Plaintiff's Perspective" 13 : 2004

    19 Laura E. Simon, "Securities Class Action Settlements : 2010 Review and Analysis" Cornerstone Research 2010

    20 Cornerstone Research, "Securities Class Action Cases Filings: 2003, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 Year in Reviews" 2010

    21 Buckberg, Elaine, "Recent Trends in Shareholder Class Action Litigation: Are WorldCom and Enron the New Standard" NERA Economic Consulting 2005

    22 Elaine Buckberg, "Recent Trends in Securities Class Action Litigation: 2003 Early Update"

    23 Richard M. Phillips, "Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Rebalancing Litigation Risks and Rewards for Class Action Plaintiffs, Defendants and Lawyers" 51 : 1009-, 1995

    24 Laura E. Simon, "Post-Reform Act Securities Settlements : 2005 Review and Analysis" Cornerstone Research 2005

    25 Laura E. Simon, "Post-Reform Act Securities Lawsuits : Settlements Reported Through December 2003" Cornerstone Research 2003

    26 Edward M. Spiro, "New Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure" 230 (230): 2003

    27 James D. Cox, "Making Securities Fraud Class Action Virtuous" 39 : 497-, 1997

    28 Roy L. Brooks, "Legal lines : Civil Procedure" Harcourt Brace Legal and Professional Publications, Inc 1993

    29 John Shad, "Introduction to Securities Class Actions: Abuses and Remedies" 1996

    30 Christopher A. Kitchen, "Interlocutory Appeal of Class Action Certification Decisions Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f): A Proposal for a New Guideline" 2004 : 231-, 2004

    31 CCMR, "Interim Report of the Committee on Capital Markets Regulation" U.S. Committee on Capital Markets Regulation 2006

    32 Michale A. Perino, "Fraud and Federalism: Preempting Private State Securities Fraud Causes of Action" 50 : 273-, 1998

    33 Elizabeth J. Goldstein, "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23: A Need for Technical Innovation" 104 : 653-, 2000

    34 Deborah R. Hensler, "Class Action Dilemmas : Pursuing Public Goals for Private Gain, Executive Summary" Rand Institute for Civil Justice 1999

    35 Brain W. Smith, "Avoiding Securities Class Actions Arising from Y2K Issues" MCB University Press 7 (7): 1999

    36 Michael A. Perino, "A Census of Securities Class Action Litigation After the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995"

    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 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2020-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2017-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2013-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2010-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2008-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2005-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2003-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.87 0.87 0.87
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.92 0.89 0.843 0.5
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼