현행 주식가치평가의 법적 쟁점과 ‘공정한 가액’에 관한 연구 = The Legal Issues Surrounding the Valuation of Shares and the Definition of ‘Fair Value’

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Qualifying shareholders disagreeing with particular corporate decisions that are stipulated under the Commercial Act and/or Capital Market and Financial Investment Service Act (“CMFISA”) may dissent and obtain payment for their shares (“appraisal remedy”), provided that the action they wish to challenge is “unlawful or fraudulent.” The dissenter is entitled to the “fair value”standard of value for their shares. This article focuses on the fair value for shareholders’ shares, and discusses how the term fair value should be interpreted. It then provides a theoretical justification for the use of Market Value as the appropriate standard for valuation.
‘Fair value’ means the value of the corporation's shares, especially,immediately before the effectuation of the corporate action to which the dissenter objects. Three calculation methods of fair value are commonly used: present value of the firm’s existing assets; the market value; and,earning value including future earning opportunities to free cash flow.
The Commercial Act and CMFISA, however, suggest that “the details of determining ‘fair value’” within the broad outlines of the definition should be left to the courts. Accordingly, the Supreme Court recently held that fair value is the “normal transaction price that reflect the object exchange value (normal deal price which was reflected objective exchange validity).” At present, however, no clear case law provides an interpretation regarding the meaning of normal transaction price.
This article is organized in six parts. Part Ⅱ addresses the nature and implication of stock and how it connects to the fair value for shareholders'shares. Part Ⅲ briefly reviews the three calculation methods of fair value for corporate value, and Part Ⅳ analyzes the statutes and case law governing the fair value for shareholders' shares, drawing particular attention to the difficulties posed by the Supreme Court's decisions. Finally, Part Ⅴ reviews relevant legal issues, fair value, fair issuing price, appraisal right, squeeze-out merger especially in relation to the appraisal methods for corporate value.
In conclusion, this article provides a theoretical justification for the use of Market Value as the appropriate standard for valuation.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김성용, "회생절차에서의 기업가치평가" 2010

2 정찬형, "회사법강의(제3판)" 박영사 2003

3 이철송, "회사법강의" 박영사 2008

4 홍복기, "회사법강의" 법문사 2010

5 권기범, "현행 주식매수청구권제도의 개선방향" 한국상장회사협의회 (41) : 2000

6 장지석, "주식의 가치에 관한 법적 고찰" 연세법학회 7 (7): 2000

7 서규석, "주식매수청구권행사시 매수가격에 관한 연구" 기업법학회 4 : 1999

8 김병연, "주식매수청구권제도의 개선에 관한 연구" (48) : 2003

9 이승철, "주식매수청구권에 관한 증권거래법 규정에 대한비판적 검토" 한국법학원 (105) : 81-103, 2008

10 김창종, "주식매수청구권. in: 증권거래에 관한 제문제(상)" 법원도서관 2001

11 김근수, "주식매수청구권 행사 결정요인에 대한 분석" 한국증권학회 36 (36): 463-494, 2007

12 손주찬, "주석상법 회사(II)" 한국사법행정학회 2003

13 최기원, "신회사법론" 박영사 2005

14 노혁준, "소수주주 축출제도의 도입에 관한 연구 － 도입형태와 가격산정을 중심으로－" 한국상사법학회 26 (26): 231-271, 2008

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

16 권기율, "상법일부개정안 검토보고서" 국회 2008

17 정찬형, "상법강의(상)(제8판)" 박영사 2005

18 임재호, "상법강의(상)" 형설출판사 2005

19 손주찬, "상법(상)" 박영사 2005

20 전현정, "비상장주식의 매수가액 결정기준" 법원도서관 (63) : 2007

21 김건식, "미국회사법상 반대주주의 주식매수청구권" 서울대법학연구소 34 (34): 1993

22 안영철, "기업의 인수?합병시 기업가치평가방법에 관한 검토(Ⅱ). in: 월간조세" 조세통람사 1996

23 김화진, "기업금융과 법률" 법학연구소 49 (49): 518-573, 2008

24 최상우, "기업금융과 M&A" 삼일인포마인 1995

25 권기범, "기업구조조정법" 삼지원 2002

26 경응수, "기업가치평가 사례연구" (44) : 2001

27 이철송, "資本去來와 任員의 刑事責任" 대한변호사협회 (359) : 96-116, 2006

28 河本一郞, "現代會社法" 商事法務 2004

29 谷光子, "株式買取請求における買受價格の決定: いわゆる類似會社比準法と純資産價格法による算出價格の平均 値を用いた例" (675) : 1978

30 江頭憲治郞, "株式會社法" 有斐閣 2006

31 江頭憲治郞, "株式の平價" (80) : 1983

32 崎田直次, "株主權(社員權)·固有權. in: 株主の權利 : 法的地位の總合分析" 中央經濟社 1991

33 崎田直次, "株主の權利 - 法的地位の總合分析" 中央經濟社 1991

34 田中誠二, "會社法詳論" 勁草書房 1973

35 江頭憲治郞, "會社法制の現代化に關する要綱案の解說(Ⅴ)" 商事法硏究會 (1725) : 2005

36 鈴木, "會社法 第3版" 1994

37 龍田節, "會社法" 1999

38 服部, "會社法" 1991

39 近藤光男, "最新株式會社法" 中央經濟社 2006

40 江頭憲治郞, "合倂發表後に取得した株式の買取價格. in: 會社判例百選 第6版" 1998

41 竹內昭夫, "企業の合倂dと分割. in: 現代企業法講座(第3卷); 企業運營" 東京大學出版會 1985

42 Christine T. Di Guglielmo, "What Happened in the Delaware Corporate Law and Governance form 1992-2004? A Retrospective on Some Key Developments" 153 : 1399-, 2005

43 Barry M. Wertheimer, "The Shareholders’ Appraisal Remedy and How Courts Determine Fair Value" 47 : 613-, 1998

44 Melvin Aron Eisenberg, "The Legal Roles of Shareholders and Management in Modern Corporate Decisionmaking" 57 : 82-, 1969

45 Elmer J. Schaefer, "The Fallacy of Weighting Asset Value and Earnings Value in the Appraisal of Corporate Stock" 55 : 1031-, 1982

46 Frank H. Easterbrook, "The Economic Structure of Corporate Law" Harv. Univ. Press 1991

47 Gregor Andrade, "New Evidence and Perspectives on Mergers" 15 : 103-, 2001

48 김화진, "M&A와 경영권" 박영사 1999

49 김홍기, "M&A계약 등에 있어서 진술보장조항의 기능과 그 위반시의 효과 - 대상판결 : 서울고등법원 2007. 1. 24. 선고 2006나11182 판결" 한국상사판례학회 22 (22): 63-107, 2009

50 Robert B. Thompson, "Exit, Liquidity, and Majority Rule: Appraisal's Rold in Corporate Law" 84 (84): 35-, 1995

51 Sara B. Moeller, "Do Shareholders of Acquiring Firms Gain from Acquisition" 2003

52 Oliver Williamson, "Corporate Finance and Corporate Governance" 43 : 567-, 1988

53 Justin B. Wineburgh, "Commentary: Recent Developments in Delaware Corporate Law: Cede & Co. v. Technicolor, Inc.: Appraising Dissenters' Shares: The “Fair Value” of Technicolor" 22 : 293-, 1997

54 David Cohen, "Comment, Valuation in the Context of Share Appraisal" 34 : 117-, 1985

55 Alexander Khutorsky, "Coming in from the Cold: Reforming Shareholders' Appraisal Rights in Freeze-out Transactions" 133 : 1997

56 "Bayless Manning, The Shareholder's Appraisal Remedy : An Essay for Frank Coker" 72 : 223-, 1963

57 "ABA, MBCA : Official Text with Official Comment and Statutory Crossreferences Revised through June 2005"