정관상 주식양도제한과 비상장주식의 매수가격 결정- 대법원 2022. 7. 28. 자 2020마5054 결정 - = Restriction on stock transfer according to the articles of incorporation and determination of purchase price of unlisted stocks

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This article examines and analyzes the Korean Supreme Court case 2022. 7. 28, 2020ma5054. The target decision was about the unlisted company which requires the shareholders to get the approval of the board of directors for the transfer of shares by the articles of incorporation; it relates to a case in which the company shareholders requested the purchase of shares when they were restricted from transferring their shares. The target decision dealt with matters related to the legality of requesting approval for the transfer of shares under the Commercial Act and the matters related to the determination of purchase price.
The Commercial Act stipulates that, for the company’s management stability, it may obtain approval from the board of directors for the transferring of shares through the articles of association. At such a time, shareholders who have been denied transfer approval may request the company to purchase shares. However, there are concerns that the case of excessive exercise of share purchase claims could harm the company’s capital adequacy, and in major foreign countries such as Japan and France, it is necessary to consider that shareholders’ share purchase claims are recognized under more strict requirements than Korean commercial act.
In a shareholder’s request for approval of the transfer of company shares, the transferring party does not necessarily need to have a legal entity at the time of the request; however, considering the legislative intent of the restriction on share transference under the articles of association, it must at least be specified to the extent to which the board of directors can determine the impact on the company’s management stability in the case of the transferring party becoming a shareholder.
In addition, it may be questionable whether an agreement on the transfer is required to be completed at the time of requesting share transfer approval. In the transfer approval request, the Commercial Act only stipulate the subject of “shareholders who intend to transfer,” and do not specifically stipulate to what extent the transfer agreement should proceed. Under the intentions of the restrictions on share transferring as stipulated according to the articles of association, the company is permitted to determine whether to accept the transferring party as a shareholder and, considering that it is not definitely necessary to complete transfer agreements between shareholders, it is reasonable in principle to assume that the agreement does not need to be completed at the time of the transfer approval request. However, there are concerns that the exercise of the right to request share purchase is abused and may harm the company’s capital adequacy. For example, if there are special circumstances such as the shareholders or the transferring party being unwilling to transfer the shares, or if it is clear that the transferring party is not willing or capable of procuring funds for share transfer, it is necessary to limit purchase requests. Given such possibilities, it is contended that the target decision judging that the applicant can request share purchase is reasonable.
On the other hand, regarding the set share purchase price for unlisted stocks, it is reasonable to determine which method to use to calculate profit value by comprehensively considering whether the stock price is distorted when calculating profit value according to the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act; this may be considered instead of the discounted cash flow of the particular industry, and whether, when calculating profit value, the data from which calculating discounted cash flow is submitted. In addition, if the net asset value is closely related to factors based on other evaluative methods, and thus the necessity for reflecting it as a separate, independent calculation factor is low, there is little room for distortion in price calculation even if the net asset value is not reflected.
Considering the above ...

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이철송, "회사법강의" 박영사 2019

2 임재연, "회사법Ⅰ" 박영사 2020

3 최준선, "회사법" 삼영사 2017

4 김건식, "회사법" 박영사 2022

5 권재열, "주식회사에서의 경영의 공정성과 효율성 ―상법상의 몇몇 규정에 대한 검토―" 한국증권법학회 22 (22): 1-22, 2021

6 "주식회사법대계" 한국상사법학회 2019

7 윤은경, "주식양수도의 상법상 통제방안에 대한 소고" 법학연구소 28 (28): 125-145, 2020

8 권기범, "주식매수청구권" 상사법학회 13 : 1994

9 "주석상법(회사Ⅱ)" 한국사법행정학회 2021

10 박영길, "정관에 의한 주식의 양도제한에 관한 일고찰" 한국상사법학회 16 (16): 1997

11 윤종진, "정관에 의한 주식양도제한의 문제점과 그 개선방안" 제12호, 청주대학교 법학연구소 (12) : 1997

12 윤영신, "정관에 의한 주식양도제한 제도 개선에 관한 입법론- 주식매수청구권의 인정 여부를 중심으로 -" 중앙법학회 14 (14): 179-204, 2012

13 이범찬, "정관에 의한 주식양도의 제한" 성균관대학교 법학연구소 6 (6): 1996

14 이성웅, "양도제한 주식의 유통법리 - 일본 주식양도법제의 변천과 이론을 중심으로 -" 법조협회 60 (60): 171-208, 2011

15 최기원, "신회사법론" 박영사 2012

16 양만식, "상법상 주식양도제한에 관한 연구" 한국경영법률학회 30 (30): 155-187, 2020

17 손주찬, "상법개정안해설" 법문사 1995

18 정찬형, "상법강의(상)" 박영사 2019

19 김홍기, "상법강의" 박영사 2022

20 송옥렬, "상법강의" 홍문사 2019

21 김민기, "국내 장외주식시장 현황과 활성화를 위한 과제" 자본시장연구원 2021

22 今井, "新版 注釋會社法(3)" 有斐閣 1986

23 小林俊明, "商事判例研究" 東京大学商法研究会 2009

24 竹內昭夫, "会社法の理論" 有斐閣 1984

25 岸田雅雄, "ゼミナール会社法入門" 日本經濟新聞社 2000