二重代表訴訟에 관한 法的考察 = A Legal Study on the Double Derivative Suit

국문 초록 (Abstract)

이중대표소송이란 회사 간에 지배·종속관계가 형성되어 있는 경우에 종속회사 이사의 부정행위로 인하여 종속회사에 손해가 발생하였을 때 종속회사의 이사에 대하여 지배회사가 대표소송의 제기를 거부하거나 다른 주주가 대표소송을 제기하지 않거나 또는 종속회사 스스로도 자신의 이사에게 소송을 제기하지 않는 경우 지배회사의 주주가 직접 종속회사를 위하여 종속회사의 이사에 대해 부정행위의 시정이 이루어지도록 제기하는 소송이다.
이에 본 연구는 첫째, 이중대표소송제도에 대한 장·단점을 살펴보고, 둘째, 선진 각국의 이중대표소송에 관한 입법사례를 분석하고, 셋째, 우리나라에 이중대표소송의 도입여부를 주장함으로써, 기업의 확장에 의해 지배?종속관계가 형성된 경우 이중대표소송을 인정하여 지배회사가 종속회사의 주식보유를 통해 가지는 종속회사의 경영이나 이사의 선임 등에서의 경제적 예속화를 미연에 방지함으로써 기업경영의 투명성, 책임성, 효율성을 확보할 수 있도록 한다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The Double Derivative Suit is presented as follows: In a situation that parent-subsidiary relations between companies are formed, when damages occur due to dishonest acts by a director of a subsidiary company, if a parent company refuse to file a representative law suit,
other shareholders or subsidiary companies themselves do not file a suit against the director, shareholders of the parent company file a suit to correct the dishonest acts of the director for the subsidiary company. The U.S. authorized the double derivative suit at the case of Ryan v. Leavenworth, Atachison & Northwestern Railway Co. in 1879 for the first time and Japan in part accepted it by revising part of the Company Law and establishing special regulations. In Korea, the issue on a double derivative suit was first raised in the late 1990s and the case law about this in 2004 put spurs to academic discussion on its necessity and legitimacy. The Seoul High Court decided that a double derivative suit is permitted under the current Commercial Code and made an attempt to introduce it into Korea on the basis of compensation and deterrence. But the Supreme court literally interpreted article 403 and declared that each of the companies in question was independent entity and, thus, a shareholder of the parent company can not have a cause of action to bring a derivative suit against the
directors of its subsidiary company. The Supreme Court did not show any other rationale for the reversion with passive attitude. From the Courts perspective that needs to pursuit the concrete validity out of individual cases, it failed to perform its duty as the machinery of law.
Korea revised part of the Business Law including the Double Derivative Suit but the article on the Double Derivative Suit was excluded because of opposition of economic circles and related departments and confirmed in National Assembly in 2009. And when the Ceiling on Total Equity Investment System was abolished in March 2009 and parent-subsidiary relations were formed through expansion of companies, subsidiary company"s economic subordination through shareholding of parent company will have an absolute influence on management of the subordinate company or appointment of directors. Therefore, of the Holding company system, the Circular Investment Regulation and the Double Derivative Suit that are considered as complementary measures of the Ceiling on Total Equity Investment System, this study analysed advantages and disadvantages of the Double Derivative Suit that was dissipated in the stage of legislation, and examples of foreign legislation to discuss necessity to introduce the Double Derivative Suit.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 요약
• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 이중대표소송의 의의 및 기능
• Ⅲ. 우리나라의 이중대표소송
• Ⅴ. 결론
• 참고문헌
• Abstract