개정 자본시장법상 유사투자자문업자의 책임에 관한 연구 = A Study on the Liability of Quasi-Investment Advisory Business under current Financial Investment Servies and Capital Markets Act

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

On August 14, 2024, an amendment to the Capital Markets and Financial Investment Business Act came into force. The amendment to the Capital Markets Act contains the strengthening of regulations on quasi-investment advisory businesses as the damage to financial consumers has increased rapidly in recent years.
The revised Capital Markets Act clarifies the reporting requirements and scope of business for quasi-investment advisory firms. It also prohibits loss compensation agreements and profit guarantee agreements. It also regulates the advertising of quasi-investment advisory businesses. The Financial Services Commission announced the results of the business inspection of quasi-investment advisory businesses in 2023. However, many of the quasi-investment advisory businesses did not fulfill their reporting obligations and provided prohibited investment advice.
The current Capital Markets Act will be able to regulate the illegal business of quasi-investment advisory firms.
Since the quasi-investment advisory business is excluded from the financial investment business, it does not bear the obligations borne by the investment advisory business under the Capital Markets Act. The case is in the same position. The Supreme Court ruled that a quasi-investment advisory business entity shall bear the liability for damages caused by illegal activities to investors. In addition, the Supreme Court recognizes the judicial effect of a quasi-investment advisory business entity when it makes a loss compensation agreement or profit guarantee agreement.
This study examines the liability for damages of quasi-investment advisory businesses after the implementation of the amendment to the Capital Markets Act. This study examines the judicial effects of loss compensation or profit guarantee agreements. Finally, this study aims to suggest directions for improvement in investor protection.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김용덕, "주석민법-채권총칙" 한국사법행정학회 2020

2 권재열, "자본시장법상 유사투자자문업자 규제 : 투자자문업자에 대한 경우와 비교를 중심으로" 사법발전재단 1 (1): 2015

3 김정수, "자본시장법 원론" SFL그룹 2014

4 김병연, "자본시장법 : 사례와 이론" 박영사 2019

5 김건식, "자본시장법" 박영사 2023

6 임재연, "자본시장법" 박영사 2022

7 이원석, "유사투자자문업자의 의무와 손해배상책임" 서울대학교 금융법센터 (74) : 2015

8 금융위원회, "유사투자자문업자의 불건전영업행위를 규율하기 위한 자본시장법이 시행됩니다"

9 금융위원회, "유사투자자문업자 관리 감독 강화방안 - 불법·불건전 영업행위를 근절하여 건전한 자본시장 질서를 뒷받침하겠습니다. -"

10 박혜진, "유사투자자문업 현황과 개선방향" 자본시장연구원 2021

11 금융위원회, "유사투자자문업 제도 개선 및 감독방안"

12 강대섭, "손실보전·이익보장의 금지 이유와 그 위반의 효력" 3 (3): 2013

13 금융위원회, "리딩방 불법행위, 끝까지 추적하여 엄중 조치하겠습니다. -유사투자자문업자 등의 불법행위 단속반 적발 실적 및 향후 계획-"

14 박준, "금융투자상품에 관한 손실보전약정과 강행법규 사회질서 위반" 한국상사판례학회 32 (32): 2019

15 青木浩子, "金融商品取引法制の潮流" 日本証券経済研究所 2015

16 Robert E. Plaze, "Regulation of Investment Advisers by the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission" Proskauer Rose LLP 2018

17 김용재, "KIKO 사건의 주요 쟁점에 관한 법리적 재검토" 한국법학원 2014

18 장근영, "2019년 자본시장법 판례회고" 한국상사판례학회 33 (33): 2020

19 강대섭, "2015년 자본시장법 주요 판례의 분석과 평가" 한국상사판례학회 29 (29): 2016