RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    집행임원 설치의 부분적 의무화에 대한 소고 = Study on the Conditional Enforcement of Executive Officers

    한글로보기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    An executive officer means a person that is in charge of corporate business and represents the corporation. Its legal basis was stipulated in the Revised Commercial Act in 2011, the purpose of which was to enhance the effectiveness of a board’s supervisory authority but, since corporations were endowed the discretion whether to adopt the executive officer system, there were few corporations which adopted the executive officer system. In 2013 the Ministry of Justice announced a revision bill which compelled listed corporations with assets of 2 trillion won or more to elect an executive officer. Although the bill had not been passed, it is still a controversial issue regarding corporate governance. It is evident that a board’s supervisory authority could be invalid in that according to the Commercial Act the board members are to monitor themselves and at least 1/4 of the board members are composed of outside directors who are hardly well-versed in the management of the corporation. Compelling its establishment, however, is not a desirable solution in that: ① the trait of Korean corporate ownership structure would prevent enhancing the board’s supervisory power well enough; ② executive authority of executive officers might shrink due to the board’s excessive power of supervision and delegation; ③ it is still possible that corporations elect executive officers that are not applied by the Commercial Act, which will emasculate the object of the bill; ④ election of executive officers are not forced in the United States, and ⑤ practically, it would be almost impossible to chare such great number of officers with liabilities against the corporation and 3rd parties. Regarding current executive officer system fixed by the Commercial Act, there are a few shortcomings that needs to be compensated. The Commercial Act does provide the procedure and requirement for establishing executive officers, which may bring about confusion in corporations and charges executive officers with excessive liabilities considering that their management function is delegated and performed under the supervision of the board. Also, to improve the board’s information access authority and the effectiveness of the board’s supervisory authority executive officer’s duty to report, that is rather passively provided in the Commercial Act, needs to be strengthened.
    번역하기

    An executive officer means a person that is in charge of corporate business and represents the corporation. Its legal basis was stipulated in the Revised Commercial Act in 2011, the purpose of which was to enhance the effectiveness of a board’s supe...

    An executive officer means a person that is in charge of corporate business and represents the corporation. Its legal basis was stipulated in the Revised Commercial Act in 2011, the purpose of which was to enhance the effectiveness of a board’s supervisory authority but, since corporations were endowed the discretion whether to adopt the executive officer system, there were few corporations which adopted the executive officer system. In 2013 the Ministry of Justice announced a revision bill which compelled listed corporations with assets of 2 trillion won or more to elect an executive officer. Although the bill had not been passed, it is still a controversial issue regarding corporate governance. It is evident that a board’s supervisory authority could be invalid in that according to the Commercial Act the board members are to monitor themselves and at least 1/4 of the board members are composed of outside directors who are hardly well-versed in the management of the corporation. Compelling its establishment, however, is not a desirable solution in that: ① the trait of Korean corporate ownership structure would prevent enhancing the board’s supervisory power well enough; ② executive authority of executive officers might shrink due to the board’s excessive power of supervision and delegation; ③ it is still possible that corporations elect executive officers that are not applied by the Commercial Act, which will emasculate the object of the bill; ④ election of executive officers are not forced in the United States, and ⑤ practically, it would be almost impossible to chare such great number of officers with liabilities against the corporation and 3rd parties. Regarding current executive officer system fixed by the Commercial Act, there are a few shortcomings that needs to be compensated. The Commercial Act does provide the procedure and requirement for establishing executive officers, which may bring about confusion in corporations and charges executive officers with excessive liabilities considering that their management function is delegated and performed under the supervision of the board. Also, to improve the board’s information access authority and the effectiveness of the board’s supervisory authority executive officer’s duty to report, that is rather passively provided in the Commercial Act, needs to be strengthened.

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼