현행 금융 분쟁 해결제도에 관한 법적 연구

노태석 ( Tae Seok Roh ) 건국대학교 법학연구소 2011 一鑑法學 Vol.0 No.19

For resolving financial disputes, an alternative dispute resolution system (the "ADR"), such as conciliation, mediation and arbitration, in addition to a litigation system by a court, may be used. The ADR system is evaluated as more beneficial one than the litigation system in terms of time and costs for resolving or settling disputes. Among the ADR system, in Korea, the conciliation system has been mainly and actively operated in the matters of financial disputes. Under the financial dispute conciliation system, the financial institutions and financial consumers concerned come to an agreement settling the relevant disputes, through reasonable adjustments arranged by the Financial Dispute Conciliation Committee (the "FDCC"), a committee established under the Financial Supervisory Service. However, the current financial dispute settlement system are assessed to have some drawbacks, among others, including the following: first, the system for settling financial disputes consists of the diversified settlement agencies so that it leads to less efficient system; second, the FDCC as the dispute resolution agency lacks the independence and professionalism; third, the rate of the FDCC`s conciliation proposal being accepted by either party is low; and fourth, the "collective financial dispute resolution procedure system" is not being operated. Therefore, this article suggests some improvements as follows: first, an independent and professional dispute resolution agency should be established; second, the FDCC`s conciliation proposal accepted by the party of financial consumers should be legally binding on the financial institutions; third, the arbitration system needs to be introduced in the financial dispute settlement system; and fourth, the "collective dispute resolution procedure system" should be also introduced.

금융분쟁의 근본적 대책: 문화, 법, 교육

유진 ( Jin Yoo ),손정국 ( Jeong-kook Son ) 한국재무관리학회 2021 財務管理硏究 Vol.38 No.1

2008년 중소기업과 상업은행 사이에 발생한 키코옵션 분쟁을 비롯하여 2020년의 라임자산운용 및 옵티머스자산운용 사모펀드 분쟁 등 우리나라의 금융분쟁은 지속적으로 발생할 뿐 아니라 오히려 더 심화되는 듯 하다. 본 연구에서는 금융교육, 법 체계 및 사회의 문화를 금융분쟁의 주요 원인으로 주목하여 논의하며, 특히 사회의 지배적 문화와 관행이 어떻게 금융분쟁에 영향을 미치는지, 그리고 이에 대한 근본적 대책은 무엇인지 고찰한다. 금융분쟁의 키워드인 금융과 분쟁은 공유하는 바가 적은, 상대적으로 이질적인 분야이다. 금융의 시각으로만 접근한 해법들이 금융분쟁 최소화에 큰 효과를 내지 못하는 상황에서, 본 연구에서는 금융분쟁이라는 울타리를 넘어 일반적 분쟁의 시각에서 이 주제를 접근한다. 금융분쟁을 비롯한 우리 사회의 분쟁과 분열이 심한 근본적 이유로 우리 사회의 해로운 문화, 가치관, 관행, 관습을 지적하며, 구체적으로는 입신양명, 위선, 비일관성에 대해 논의한다. 또한 구체적 사례를 들어, 분쟁과 분열을 초래하는 우리 사회의 잘못된 문화와 관행의 개선 방안을 제시한다. Financial disputes between financial institutions and consumers in Korea have intensified till year 2020 since the KIKO option portfolio tragedy between SMEs and commercial banks occurred in year 2008. This may be due to the problems in financial education, legal systems, etc. However, we believe that, fundamentally, the culture, values, and norms of a society give rise to most disputes, including financial ones, and that, accordingly, financial disputes can only be significantly weakened by changing those of the whole society. Further, we should understand that finance and disputes share little in common and that financial disputes are just a subset of disputes in general. Consequently, we focus our attention to how to resolve disputes in general rather than to detailed solutions to specific financial disputes. We discuss 1) success-only culture 2) hypocrisy, and 3) inconsistent and self-contradictory behavior in our society as the main sources of most kinds of disputes in our society, including financial ones. Moreover, we examine how to improve such problems of our society by taking a few examples.

일본의 금융분야 ADR에 관한 검토

김선정 한국중재학회 2010 중재연구 Vol.20 No.3

In the past, ADR has not been used as frequently in Japan as it has in other parts of the industrialized world. However, though litigation is still the most utilized vehicle of dispute resolution by Japanese financial institutions, this will be changing. The New Financial ADR system, which was created by a June 2009 amendment to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act , is meant to deal with every stage of financial-related disputes and, as such, strives to resolve disputes before they become significant and acts to ameliorate any post-ADR issues that may remain, thereby completing the FIEA's purpose to protect investors. Since the foundation of the New Financial ADR system applies to all related industries, new provisions were set out in 16 business related acts, such as the Banking Act, the Insurance Business Act, and FIEA itself. October 2010 will mark the formal introduction of a new system of financial ADR in Japan. New Financial ADR in Japan will be modeled on the Financial Ombudsman Service in the United Kingdom, but will not feature one comprehensive dispute resolution system in which one dispute resolution institution covers all disputes in the financial field. The New Financial ADR system is merely one step towards a foundation of comprehensive financial ADR such as FOS. It must be noted, however, that this all important first step was over seven years in the making, involving a great deal of discussion, debate, and compromise amongst many parts of Japanese government, business, and society. The New Financial ADR system grants participating parties the ability to stop the clock on any statute of limitations which may correspond to any future possible court cases related to the dispute,13 and further grants the ability to suspend related court proceedings while the parties are utilizing the New Financial ADR system.In addition, where financial institutions have not accepted dispute resolution proceedings or have not accepted a special conciliation proposal, the Ministry of Finance may issue an order compelling compliance if it is found that certain actions are necessary to ensure the appropriate operations of a financial institution's business. In Japan, as best practices have not yet been created.

금융거래에 있어서 투자자 분쟁해결제도의 법적 쟁점

맹수석(Maeng, Soo Seok) 한국증권법학회 2010 증권법연구 Vol.11 No.2

최근 금융공학기술의 발전에 의해 복잡다기한 파생금융상품이 출현하는 등 금융투자 환경이 급변하고 있고, 금융시장의 활성화 정책에 힘입어 일반 소비자의 금융투자 기회도 증가하고 있다. 그런데 금융투자상품의 경우 원금손실의 위험과 당사자 사이에 정보판단능력의 비대칭성이라는 특성이 있기 때문에 다른 금융상품에 비하여 법적 분쟁이 발생할 가능성이 매우 높다. 분쟁이 발생한 경우 전통적인 해결방법인 민사소송절차에 의하면 비용과 시간 등의 측면에서 부담이 되기 때문에, ADR이라는 분쟁해결제도가 활용되고 있다. 그러나 다양한 ADR제도 가운데 현재 조정제도만이 유일하게 이용되고 있을 뿐만 아니라, 조정 결정의 강제력 등에 있어서도 여러 가지 문제점이 존재한다. 제도적 불비로 인하여 금융소비자의 피해가 커질수록 금융시장에 대한 불신의 벽이 높아지고, 이는 결국 우리 금융시장이 선진 단계로 나아가는데 장애물로 작용하게 될 것이다. 이러한 측면에서 본 논문에서는 금융분쟁이 발생한 경우 이를 효율적이고 합리적으로 해결할 수 있는 다각적인 개선방안을 모색해 보았다. 금융분쟁 사건에 있어서 조정제도 이외에 중재제도 등을 적극적으로 활용할 수 있는 방안이 강구되어야 할 것이다. 또한 분쟁조정시 일률적으로 처리되고 있는 조정기간 및 조정위원회의 인적 구성도 사안의 복잡성이나 전문성에 따라 다르게 할 필요가 있다. 그리고 금융분쟁조정의 효율성과 조정 내용의 전문성을 확보하기 위해서는 여러 기관에 분산되어 있는 금융ADR절차를 일원화시켜야 할 것이다. 특히 각종 공제와 관련한 분쟁사건을 금융분쟁조정위원회에서 통합적으로 처리하도록 하여야 할 것이고, 향후 분쟁조정의 객관성과 신뢰성을 높이기 위해 금융분쟁조정위원회를 별도의 독립된 법인 형태로 설립·운영하는 방안도 검토할 필요가 있다고 본다. 아울러 자율규제 시스템을 강화하기 위해 금융회사별로 자신들의 금융투자상품 판매 등의 과정에서 생긴 분쟁을 사전에 해결할 수 있는 회사내 민원처리 절차를 갖추도록 하고, 금융ADR제도의 실효성을 확보하기 위해 분쟁조정위원회의 조정결정이 있는 경우 금융회사에 대한 편면적 구속력을 인정하여야 할 것이다. The circumstances of financial investment have abruptly changed due to the development of financial engineering techniques, including commodity derivatives and, with positive boosting policy for financial market, the opportunities for investment by consumers are increasing. But financial commodity has significant risk of losing the principal invested, and there exists the asymmetry of information judgement ability between the parties, with high potential of legal disputes in comparison with other financial commodity. For the resolution of that dispute, a traditional approach by civil action causes high cost and too much time, so autonomous resolution system, ADR, is being used. Only the arbitration is prevailing out of many resolution systems, which has a problem in the binding forces of the decision by arbitration. The more serious the financial consumer"s damage grows due to its poor system, the higher distrust is getting. This will hinder our financial market"s advance to developed financial market. In this point, this thesis will demonstrate what is the effective and rational solution for financial disputes. Namely, financial disputes should have other ADR systems extensively adopted including arbitration and mediation. In addition, a fixed term and conservative formation of arbitration panel shall vary with the complexity and specialty. And a variety of ADR systems adapted into many organizations should be integrated by a single procedure to get the efficiency and specialty of financial dispute arbitration. Especially, the disputes arising out of each deduction at post office and other institutions should be solved at the Financial Dispute Resolution Committee in an integrated way. It shall be considered that the Financial Dispute Resolution Committee shall be incorporated into and operated as a separate and independent agency (or company) to establish and enhance its credibility and fairness. And the decision of arbitration should have an ex parte binding force to financial institutions and in?house grievance process, a self?regulation system, shall be arranged to solve the disputes occurred in the course of sales of their investment commodity and other activities by each institution.

금융상품 약관 규제에 대한 주요 판례의 고찰

최자유 한국금융소비자학회 2022 금융소비자연구 Vol.12 No.2

The fundamental law dealing with the terms and conditions, the Terms and Conditions Regulation Act, aims to establish a sound order in business transactions and protect consumers by stipulating the principle of disadvantage for authors, prohibition of unfair terms and conditions, and the obligation to state and explain. In addition to the application of the Terms and Conditions Regulation Act, the terms and conditions of financial products are subject to pre-examination and post-report by the Financial Supervisory Service. They are subject to additional regulations, such as the obligation to state and explain under the Financial Consumer Protection Act. Financial authorities review the specific transaction relationship ex-post, such as being subject to sanctions if a financial institution violates the obligation to specify and explain the terms and conditions. Consumers can apply for the mediation of financial disputes with the Financial Supervisory Service when a dispute over financial products occurs. In disputes over terms and conditions, the issues are i) whether the specific contract could be categorized into the terms and conditions, ii) how to interpret the content, iii) whether unfairness of the interpreted content exists, iv) whether the obligation to state and explain would be satisfied, and v) how to determine the rights and obligations between the parties based on valid terms and conditions. This study analyzes the regulation method of terms and conditions, pre-regulation of terms and conditions for financial products, and solutions in case of disputes. It critically considers court precedents concerning i)∼v), which should be considered in writing and enforcing the terms and conditions. In reviewing the contents and terms and conditions and resolving disputes, the contents to be reviewed would be presented categorically. The contents of a contract between a financial institution and a financial consumer generally fall under the terms and conditions. It is the first step in protecting financial consumers for financial institutions with a superior position in transactions to fulfill their obligations of explanation according to transparent and fair terms and conditions and sell financial products to financial consumers. 약관에 대한 기본법인 약관규제법은 작성자 불이익 원칙, 불공정 약관 금지, 명시ㆍ설명의무 등을 통해 건전한 거래질서 확립과 소비자 보호를 도모한다. 금융상품 약관은 약관규제법의 적용에 아울러 금융감독원의 사전심사ㆍ사후보고 대상이 되고 금융소비자보호법에 따른 설명의무 등 추가 규제를 적용받는다. 금융상품에 대한 분쟁이 발생하면 소비자는 금융감독원에 분쟁조정 신청을 할 수 있고 금융기관이 약관의 명시ㆍ설명의무를 위반하면 제재 대상이 되는 등 사후적으로도 금융당국이 구체적 거래 관계를 검토한다. 금융상품에 대한 분쟁에서 ⅰ) 계약의 약관성, ⅱ) 약관 내용의 해석, ⅲ) 해석된 내용의 불공정성, ⅳ) 명시ㆍ설명의무의 이행 여부, ⅴ) 당사자의 권리ㆍ의무의 확정 방법이 쟁점이다. 본 연구는 약관의 규제 방법ㆍ금융상품 약관의 규제ㆍ분쟁 발생 시 해결 방안 등을 분석하고, 법원의 판례를 ⅰ)∼ⅴ)와 관련하여 비판적으로 고찰하여 약관의 작성ㆍ운용 과정에서 유의해야 할 내용 및 약관의 심사ㆍ분쟁의 해결 과정에서 검토해야 할 내용을 유형화하여 제시하고자 한다. 금융기관과 금융소비자의 계약 내용은 통상 약관에 해당한다. 거래상 우월적 지위에 있는 금융기관이 명확하고 공정한 약관에 따라 중요 내용의 명시ㆍ설명의무를 이행하며 금융상품을 판매하는 것은 금융소비자 보호를 위한 첫걸음이다.

금융분쟁해결제도의 문제점과 개선방안

나윤수(Rha, Yoon-SOO),박강익(Park Kang-Ik),박홍진(Park Hong-Jin),이경민(Lee Kyung-Min) 원광대학교 법학연구소 2007 圓光法學 Vol.23 No.1

Financial market is where supply and demand sides trade capital through brokerage. Traditional indirect financial market such as banks and insurers along with direct financial market including securities firms serve as a channel providing capital to corporations and is actually playing a very important role in terms of building the basis for the bullish economy. For the financial market to play its economic functions properly per se provision of long term corporate capital, the investors who provide the capital and a market participant should be protected in a more transparent market environment. Therefore, it is crucial to have and run a system to resolve disputes between market participants such as financial organizations and investors quickly and fairly. Given that the complexity of the financial trade, asymmetry of information, and lack of professional training in the part of investors put them in relative disadvantage against the financial organizations, appropriate dispute resolution measures protecting the market participants such as investors while providing professional information are needed should take place. Although legal procedure has been well established as a means to resolve disputes, the issues of relevant heavy cost and lengthy time led many countries across the world to adopt Alternative Dispute Resolution: ADR which can replace the legal system. There are various forms of ADR which has been widely acknowledged: advice, negotiation, settlement, mediation, conciliation, arbitration. The standard in this process is how much a third party intervention is allowed and how strong the binding power is. Those arbitration system have replaced the legal systems as a way to solve disputes in a wide range of areas in many financially advanced countries such as the US and UK. In Korea conciliation and arbitration are favored in terms to financial dispute. The arbitration regulating legislation was stipulated in 1966. Today most of the arbitration cases are dealt with in the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board. However, arbitration as a means of securities related dispute has not been actively sought after. When it comes to securities related dispute, Financial Supervisory Service, Korea Consumer Agency, Korea Stock Exchange, and The Korea Securities Dealers Association handle the arbitration in compliance with legislation for financial watchdog, consumer protection, and securities trade. Below, I will talk more about the current status of the Financial Dispute Resolution, along with the problems and the measures for improvement.

금융분쟁과 투자자 보호

유진,손정국 한국재무관리학회 2017 財務管理硏究 Vol.34 No.4

For some two decades, disputes between financial institutions and financial consumers have taken place all around the world. From the disputes do financial consumers suffer financially and even go bankrupt. Financial institutions have to reimburse the losses financial consumers suffer, too, and they themselves also suffer in terms of reputation. We explore the fundamental causes of, and effective resolutions of, financial disputes. We find that the former are, among others, misguided financial education, laws, and cultures and norms of a society and that the latter are an emphasis on bounded rationality of consumers in financial education, behaviorally based financial policies, change in cultures and norms of a society toward consumer protection, and improvement in unequal legal system. We also examine what kind of a role each of the six causes of financial disputes plays in evolution of process of a financial dispute. 오늘날 금융기관과 금융소비자 사이의 금융분쟁은 우리나라는 물론이고 자본주의의 메카라는 미국 등 국가를 가리지 않고 발생하고 있다. 이로 인해 많은 금융소비자들이 막대한 경제적 피해를 입음은 물론 금융기관들도 배상에 따른 비용 그리고 도덕성과 평판에 있어 보이지 않는 비용까지 지불하고 있다. 본 연구에서는 이처럼 개인적, 사회적 폐해가 심대한 금융분쟁의 본질적 원인을 규명하고 이에 대한 실효적 대책을 제시한다. 구체적으로, 금융분쟁의 본질적 원인으로는 통상적으로 거론되는 정보비대칭, 모럴해저드, 이해상충 외에도 금융교육, 법체계, 그리고 전체 사회의 문화와 관행을 제시하며 논의한다. 또 이러한 각 요인이 금융분쟁의 각 단계에서 여하히 작동하는지를 분석한다. 마지막으로 금융분쟁 피해를 최소화하기 위한 대책으로 새로운 금융교육, 경제주체의 행태를 반영하는 정책, 사회의 문화와 가치관 변화 및 법체계의 형평성 제고를 제시하고 이에 관해 논의한다.

주제별 논단 : 금융분쟁해결제도 ; 금융ADR제도에 관한 연구

양만식 ( Man Sig Yang ) 한국금융법학회 2013 金融法硏究 Vol.10 No.2

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is different from court rule in that a person for neutral procedure is involved unlike negotiation or reconciliation between parties in disputes that need the involvement of the courts, one of the state powers. Its strong points include transparency, neutrality, and fairness compared to the negotiation and reconciliation. In a negotiation with a partner in dispute, the gap in terms of legal knowledge and money between partners can lead to unfair or unclear resolutions for a relatively weaker partner, and it becomes more difficult to resolve the case at the end of the negotiation. ADR, however, involves the third person with neutrality and fairness to fix the gap and seek for fair resolution. It even increases the possibility to resolve the stalemate of the dispute through the third person`s involvement. ADR has more benefits in terms of time, cost, flexibility, confidentiality and expertise. ADR is used in diverse cases of consumer`s complaints, medical conflicts and international trades. We can also think of using ADR in resolving financial disputes. Because of the diversity and complexity in the financial market, the disputes cannot be resolved with only legal knowledge. Along with the diverse financial products, consumers buying the products increase, and in accordance buying and selling of the financial products happens daily. On the contrary, consumers` lack of knowledge, sellers` inefficient explanation, exaggerative advertisement of the products and financial fraud cause loss of investment by the consumers, increasing the financial disputes. Just like other disputes between individuals, it is realistic to resolve the financial disputes in the court, but consumers have less information than the financial companies and they are weaker in terms of money and expertise. Considering the situation, it is problematic to resolve the disputes in the court. Therefore, it is much more economical and efficient to use ADR which has many benefits of time, money and expertise.

Five Effective Ways to Resolve Omnipresent Financial Disputes

( Jin Yoo ) 한국금융연구원 2012 금융연구 Vol.26 No.3

These days, disputes between financial consumers and financial institutions arise in various situations in various nations, including those between Goldman Sachs and its investors in the US or those between various financial institutions and their customers in Korea. These disputes could make financial consumers suffer financial distress and even go bankrupt. Besides, these disputes, which are often terminated finally in civil or criminal court, take lots of time, energy, and economic resources from both parties involved so the welfare of the whole socio-economy decreases greatly. Furthermore, since the winners of such disputes in court are usually financial institutions which have more information and more money, they rarely try sincerely to correct themselves even if their maltreatment of consumers is the source of the disputes. Because of these potentially-devastating outcomes, the financial authorities in most countries are keen on preventing such disputes ex ante and resolving them ex post. To serve the purposes, however, the very nature of such disputes should be understood first, and then, some effective ways out of them should be discovered. Using a theoretical model, we first examine the fundamental causes for the disputes in terms of existing financial theories, risk-return incentives for financial institutions and consumers, and their behavioral traits. Also, largely based on the model, we suggest five effective ways to prevent and resolve the disputes, which are i) education of misselling and bounded rationality, ii) advising by experts like IFAs in the UK, iii) opt-out policy, iv) periodic settlement with premature closing out, and v) early diagnosis.

Five Effective Ways to Resolve Omnipresent Financial Disputes

유진 한국금융학회 2012 금융연구 Vol.26 No.3

These days, disputes between financial consumers and financial institutions arise in various situations in various nations, including those between Goldman Sachs and its investors in the US or those between various financial institutions and their customers in Korea. These disputes could make financial consumers suffer financial distress and even go bankrupt. Besides, these disputes,which are often terminated finally in civil or criminal court, take lots of time, energy, and economic resources from both parties involved so the welfare of the whole socio-economy decreases greatly. Furthermore, since the winners of such disputes in court are usually financial institutions which have more information and more money, they rarely try sincerely to correct themselves even if their maltreatment of consumers is the source of the disputes. Because of these potentially-devastating outcomes, the financial authorities in most countries are keen on preventing such disputes ex ante and resolving them ex post. To serve the purposes, however, the very nature of such disputes should be understood first, and then, some effective ways out of them should be discovered. Using a theoretical model, we first examine the fundamental causes for the disputes in terms of existing financial theories, risk-return incentives for financial institutions and consumers, and their behavioral traits. Also, largely based on the model, we suggest five effective ways to prevent and resolve the disputes, which are i) education of misselling and bounded rationality, ii) advising by experts like IFAs in the UK, iii) opt-out policy, iv) periodic settlement with premature closing out, and v) early diagnosis.