회생계획인가의 효력에 관한 판례 비평 = A Comment on a Case on the Effect of Rehabilitation Plan

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The existing debt of a company that has filed the corporate rehabilitation proceeding can be reduced or deferred according to the rehabilitation plan. Some problems occur, however, with respect to this sort of effect of rehabilitation plan: First, the meanings of ‘the exemption’ in Article 251 and ‘the modification’ in Article 252 Clause 1; second, the relationship between Article 251 ‘the exemption’ and Article 252 ‘the modification’.
First of all, about the meanings of the exemption and the modification, there is a venue(the debt nullification speculation) that the debt from rehabilitation creditors and security holders is completely nullified, and there is another venue(the liability nullification speculation) that the debt is not nullified but it is only the obligation for liquidation that is entitled to nullification. The Supreme Court adopts the liability nullification speculation about Article 251 and the debt nullification speculation about Article 252 Clause 1. This is, however, not a comprehensive interpretation of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act, and is inappropriate due to the excessively predisposed result from a literal interpretation of the text.
Moreover, a broad principle for the relation of both parties should be to stipulate a perspective that Article 251 should exclude acknowledged rights according to the provisions of rehabilitation plan or similar provisions, when the rehabilitation plan has been authorized. Thereby, the company is nullified from the obligation from all rehabilitation bonds and securities. Article 252 Clause 1 should be interpreted as that the right reflected on the rehabilitation plan changes the right according to the contents of the rehabilitation plan; that is, the right is seen to be acknowledged according to the rehabilitation plan. Consequently, an unapproved component should be considered to be exempted from the obligation according to Article 251.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 서울중앙지방법원 파산부 실무연구회, "회생사건실무 (상, 하)" 박영사 2011

2 임채홍, "회사정리법 (하)" 한국사법행정학회 1999

3 박승두, "회사정리법" 법률SOS 2000

4 박승두, "통합도산법 분석" 법률SOS 2005

5 곽윤직, "채권총론" 박영사 2002

6 박승두, "도산법총론" 법률SOS 2002

7 박승두, "기업회생절차의 진행단계별 쟁점에 관한 연구" 한국경영법률학회 22 (22): 175-215, 2011

8 高木新二郞, "講座倒産の法システム, In 再建型倒産處理手續" 日本評論社 2010

9 佐藤鐵男, "相殺と否認, In 倒産判例百選" 有斐閣 2002

10 兼子一監修, "條解會社更生法 (上, 中, 下)" 弘文堂 1998

11 小屋敏一, "會社更生法 (上,中Ⅰ,中Ⅱ,下)" 中央大學出版部 1978

12 田邊光政, "最新 倒産法･會社法をめぐる實務上の諸問題" 民事法硏究會 2005

13 淸水 直, "企業再建の眞髓" 商事法務 2005

14 三木浩一, "ロ-スク-ル倒産法" 有斐閣 2005