상법상의 소수주주 축출제도 -소수주식 강제매수제도와 교부금 합병제도를 중심으로- = Squeeze-out or Freeze-Out of Minority Shareholders under the Korean Commercial Code

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper is intended to discuss the controversial issue of the system of Squeeze-Out or Freeze-Out.
Squeeze-Out or Freeze-Out is a term referring to the compulsory acquisition of the stakes of a small group of shareholders from a joint stock company by means of cash compensation. In Germany, a pool of shareholders owning at least 95% of a company's shares has the right to “squeeze out” the remaining minority of shareholders by paying them an adequate compensation. This procedure is based on the Securities Acquisition and Takeover Act (WpÜG). An alternative procedure is governed by Articles 327a-327f of the German Stock Corporation Ac (AktG), valid since January 1.st 2002. In the meantime, under the U.S.
squeeze-outs are governed by State laws. For example, Delaware Corporation law permits a parent corporation owning at least 90% of the stock of a subsidiary to merge with that subsidiary, and to pay off in cash the minority shareholders. The consent of the minority shareholders is not required. They are merely entitled to receive fair value for their shares.
In Korea, now, the squeeze-out system is introduced in Articles 24 of 360 - 26 of 360 under the amended Korean Commercial Code. According to new articles of amended law, controlling shareholders who own 95%of the stock issued by a company Compulsory purchase the stocks of minority shareholders who have under 5% of issued stocks of the company, so that controlling shareholders can squeeze out minority shareholders. Thus, under the new scheme of Korean law, the issues of ensuring the fairness or justice related the protection of minority shareholders become controversial. The most important thing is to guarantee fairness under the legal system. Also, it is necessary to arrange systematic and effective methods for a protection of minority shareholders.
It is time when we should reconsider its legal system with great interest in order to harmonize with the protection of minority shareholders.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이철송, "회사법강의(제15판)" 박영사 2008

2 안택식, "회사법 해설 법률지식 -개정2판-" 청림출판 2000

3 신석훈, "회사가치평가와 비상장주식의 공정가치" KERI Column 2011

4 권기범, "현대회사법론" 삼지원 2001

5 장영수, "헌법학, 제5판" 홍문사 2010

6 장덕조, "지배주주의 충실의무" (18) : 2000

7 강희갑, "지배주주의 충실의무" 12 : 1993

8 서완석, "지배주주와 주주유한책임원칙" 한국상사법학회 23 (23): 407-462, 2004

9 노혁준, "주요국가의 기업규제 개혁법제에 관한 비교법적 연구(Ⅲ) -영국" 한국법제연구원 2008

10 최승재, "주식가치 평가와 공정한 가액에 대한 고찰 반대주주의 주식매수청구권을 중심으로" 연세대학교 글로벌 비즈니스와 법센터 2 (2): 2010

11 서완석, "유가증권발행시장의 공시제도" 한국학술정보 2007

12 김효신, "소수주주축출제도의 도입방안에 대한 검토" 법무부 (50) : 40-58, 2010

13 김화진, "소수주식의 강제매수제도" 법학연구소 50 (50): 321-350, 2009

14 송옥렬, "상법강의" 홍문사 2011

15 신석훈, "비상장주식 가치평가와 법. in: 세법·형법·회사법" 한국경제연구원 2011

16 김재형, "미국에서 합병대가의 유연화와 소수주주축출에 관한 입법의 변천과 법원의 대응" 한국기업법학회 18 (18): 57-74, 2004

17 金聖虎, "미국 회사법상 ＂소수주주 축출의 정당성＂에 관한 고찰" 한국기업법학회 21 (21): 297-316, 2007

18 마르쿠스 루터, "독일법에서의 주주의 충실의무" 38 (38): 1997

19 江頭憲治郞, "結合企業法の立法と解釋" 有斐閣 1995

20 江頭憲治郞, "株式會社法(第二版)" 有斐閣 2008

21 岡田昌浩, "少数株主締め出しと株式取得の対価の公正性の確保, In 森本 滋先生 還曆記念論文, 企業法の課題と展望" 商事法務 2009

22 久保寬展, "少数株主の締出しの正?性と?利濫用, In 森本 滋先生 還曆記念論文, 企業法の課題と展望" 商事法務 2009

23 玉井利幸, "少数株主に対する取締役と支配株主の義務と責任 少数株主の締出を中心に, In 川村正幸先生退職記念論文集(会社法·金融法の新展開)" (株)中央経済社 2009

24 片木晴彦, "企業組織再編 対価の柔軟化と少数株主の保護, 会社法における主要点の評価" 中央経済社 2006

25 太田洋, "レックス․ホールディングス事件東京地裁決定の検討" (1837) : 2008

26 高橋英治, "ドイツと日本における株式会社法の改革" 商事法務 2007

27 John T. Richer, "When controlling shareholders squeeze out minority shareholders by reverse stock split in close corporations-a proposal for Kansas Courts" 50 : 545-, 2002

28 Sandra K. Miller, "What Buy-Out Rights, Fiduciary Duties, and Dissolution Remedies Should Apply in the Case of the Minority Owner of a Limited Liability Company" 38 : 413-, 2001

29 Julie Gwyn Hudson, "The exclusivity of the appraisal remedy under the new north carolina business corporation act: deciding the standard of review for cash-out mergers" 69 : 501-, 1991

30 James M. Van Vliet Jr., "The evolving fiduciary duty solution for sareholders caught in a closely held corporation trap" 18 : 239-, 1998

31 Leonardo Pinta, "The U.S. and Italy: Controlling shareholder's fiduciary duties in freeze out mergers and tender offers" 7 : 931-, 2011

32 Mary Siegel, "The Erosion of the Law of Controlling Shareholders" 24 : 27-, 1999

33 A.C. Pritchard, "Tender offers by controlling shareholders: the specter of coercion and fair price" 1 : 83-, 2004

34 Franklin A. Gevurtz, "Squeeze-Outs and Freeze-Outs in limited liability companies" 73 : 497-, 1995

35 Douglas K. Moll, "Shareholder Oppression in Close Corporations: The Unanswered Question of Perspective" 53 : 749-, 2000

36 Julian Javier Garza, "Rethinking Corporate Governance: The role of minority shareholders - A comparative study" 31 : 613-, 2001

37 Hyeok-Joon Rho, "New squeeze-out devices as a part of corporate law reform in korea: what type of device is required for a developing economy" 29 : 41-, 2011

38 William E. Knepper, "Liability of Corporate Officers and Directors 6th ed" 1998

39 Mary Siegel, "Going Private: Three doctrines gone astray" 4 : 399-, 2008

40 Marco Ventoruzzo, "Freeze-Outs: Transcontinental analysis and reform proposals" 50 : 841-, 2010

41 Iman Anabtawi, "Fiduciary duties for activist shareholders" 60 : 1255-, 2008

42 Ronald J. Gilson, "Doctrines and Markets: Controlling Controlling Shareholders" 152 : 785-, 2003

43 James D. Cox, "Cox & Hazen on Corporations" Wolters Kluwer 2003

44 Jeffrey D. Bauman, "Corporations Law and Policy 6th ed" Thompson West 1994

45 William T. Allen, "Commentaries and Cases on the law of business organization" Aspen Publishers 2007

46 Angie Woo, "Appraisal rights in mergers of publicly-held Delaware corporations: something old, something new, something borrowed, and something B.L.U.E" 68 : 719-, 1995

47 Rutherford B. Campbell, Jr., "A Positive Analysis of the Common Law of Corporate Fiduciary Duties" 84 : 455-, 1995