RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
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
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      주주제안권(株主提案權) 행사(行使)의 범위(範圍)와 회사의 이익보호 -관서전력주식회사주주(關西電力株式會社株主)의 권리행사(權利行使)에 관한 사건을 중심으로- = Scope of Shareholders` Exercise of Right to Make Proposal and Protection of Company’s Interest -Focused on the case whereby shareholders of Kansai Electric Co., Ltd.-

      한글로보기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      Minority shareholders other than major shareholder (controlling shareholder) commanding the governing power at the shareholders’ meeting, cannot exercise particular influence on the company’s management due to their weak position at the shareholders general meeting, despite of their capital contribution to the company, and hence are frequently indifferent to the management thereof. Therefore, these minority shareholder shall be permitted to be in charge of the monitoring function on the management by beung ganted a role to contain controlling shareholder and contribute to securing the sound management of the company. The concrete judicial realization thereof is the minority shareholders’ right, which is granted only minority shareholder holding not less than a certain amount of shares. One of such minority shareholders’ right adopted officially in the revised Commercial Code in 1998 was the shareholders`` right to make proposal. So far since the adoption of shareholders`` right to make proposal, the theoretical and interpretational and systemic framework was speedily and easily constituted based on the legislation cases and accumulated theories etc. However, in Korea, there is no dispute so far on practice or positive law regarding shareholders`` right to make proposal. As such, it is true that we never know how and on which issue such dispute on practice or positive law with regard thereto can arise, and in case we confront such problem what would be the interpretational guideline for resolution thereof, in current situation. Therefore it would also be very important to find out such issues and the interpretational guideline therefor from foreign cases and through comparative law research, on the resolving level of future problems related to this system.Hereafter this study proceeds by focusing review on the recent Japanese judicial case (Osaka High Court, decided on November 8, 2013) whereby it was determined whether a minority shareholder’s exercise of the right to request perusal and reproduction of the board of directors’ minutes without such right being particularly organized as a minority shareholder’s ancillary right to substantial exercise of shareholders`` right to make proposal, shall be regarded as the excessive exercise of shareholders’ rights, and whether such exercise of shareholders’ right shall be justified even if the management determines and argues that the contents of the minutes of the board of directors’ meeting shall be acknowledged as corporate secret, as part of the comparative law research from previous foreign cases. This study presented what would be the scope of shareholders’ exercise of right to make proposal and the interpretational guideline for resolution of the conflict of interest as the main effect of the study, and sought what are the management’s responding measures for protection of the company’s interest and discharge of their responsibility on the issues related to shareholders’ exercise of right related to interested parties, which may arise in Korean corporate practices as the ancillary effect hereof.
      번역하기

      Minority shareholders other than major shareholder (controlling shareholder) commanding the governing power at the shareholders’ meeting, cannot exercise particular influence on the company’s management due to their weak position at the shareholde...

      Minority shareholders other than major shareholder (controlling shareholder) commanding the governing power at the shareholders’ meeting, cannot exercise particular influence on the company’s management due to their weak position at the shareholders general meeting, despite of their capital contribution to the company, and hence are frequently indifferent to the management thereof. Therefore, these minority shareholder shall be permitted to be in charge of the monitoring function on the management by beung ganted a role to contain controlling shareholder and contribute to securing the sound management of the company. The concrete judicial realization thereof is the minority shareholders’ right, which is granted only minority shareholder holding not less than a certain amount of shares. One of such minority shareholders’ right adopted officially in the revised Commercial Code in 1998 was the shareholders`` right to make proposal. So far since the adoption of shareholders`` right to make proposal, the theoretical and interpretational and systemic framework was speedily and easily constituted based on the legislation cases and accumulated theories etc. However, in Korea, there is no dispute so far on practice or positive law regarding shareholders`` right to make proposal. As such, it is true that we never know how and on which issue such dispute on practice or positive law with regard thereto can arise, and in case we confront such problem what would be the interpretational guideline for resolution thereof, in current situation. Therefore it would also be very important to find out such issues and the interpretational guideline therefor from foreign cases and through comparative law research, on the resolving level of future problems related to this system.Hereafter this study proceeds by focusing review on the recent Japanese judicial case (Osaka High Court, decided on November 8, 2013) whereby it was determined whether a minority shareholder’s exercise of the right to request perusal and reproduction of the board of directors’ minutes without such right being particularly organized as a minority shareholder’s ancillary right to substantial exercise of shareholders`` right to make proposal, shall be regarded as the excessive exercise of shareholders’ rights, and whether such exercise of shareholders’ right shall be justified even if the management determines and argues that the contents of the minutes of the board of directors’ meeting shall be acknowledged as corporate secret, as part of the comparative law research from previous foreign cases. This study presented what would be the scope of shareholders’ exercise of right to make proposal and the interpretational guideline for resolution of the conflict of interest as the main effect of the study, and sought what are the management’s responding measures for protection of the company’s interest and discharge of their responsibility on the issues related to shareholders’ exercise of right related to interested parties, which may arise in Korean corporate practices as the ancillary effect hereof.

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      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