자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률(자본시장법)상 특수관계인 규정의 개선방안 = An Improvement Proposals on the "Specially Related Person" in Korean 'Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act'

국문 초록 (Abstract)

자본시장법상 특수관계인 규정은 동법상의 대주주에 관련된 규정을 회피하기 위하여 자신의 친족이나 자신이 지배하는 회사 또는 그 회사의 임원 등과 같이 특수한 지위에 있는 자에게 자신의 소유지분을 분산시킴으로써 자신의 형식적인 지분을 낮추는 현상 등을 규제하기 위하여 존재하는 것이다. 결국, 형식적인 소유관계의 여하에 상관없이 실질적인 지배관계(예컨대, 사실상 영향력)를 파악하여 법률회피행위를 단속하여 규제함으로써 자본시장법의 목적을 달성하고자 하는 것이다. 이러한 점에 비추어 볼 때, 특수관계인 관련 규정은 그 실질적 존재의의가 있다고 할 것이다. 더욱이 자본시장법상의 특수관계인 관련 규정은 여타 경제 관련 법령에서 준용하거나 차용하고 있는 개념이다. 자본시장법은 자본시장에서의 금융혁신과 공정한 경쟁을 촉진하고 투자자를 보호하며 금융투자업을 건전하게 육성하여 자본시장의 공정성.신뢰성 및 효율성을 높이기 위하여 대주주와의 거래제한 등 일정하게 우월적 지위에 있는 자와 관련된 정보 및 거래행위를 규율하기 위하여 특수관계인의 개념을 사용해 오고 있다. 그러나 자본시장법상의 특수관계인의 규율은 현재의 핵가족제도 하에서 비현실적인 면이 있고, 더욱이 양성의 평등을 규정하고 있는 헌법 제36조 제1항에 위배되는 문제점도 안고 있다. 또한 자본시장법상의 특수관계인 관련 규정에는 규제측면을 강조하여 너무 지나치게 엄격한 규정들이 산재해 있다. 이러한 규정들도 합리적인 규율체계로 새로이 재정립될 필요가 있다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The "Specially Related Person" is one of the Problems to deal with the negative phenomenon of economy. 'Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act(beneath FSCMA)' in Korea also includes the provisions on the concept of the 'Specially Related Person'. But the provisions have some problems and have been
criticised in legal point of view. The rules of the 'Specially Related Person' in the FSCMA have an unrealistic under a current nuclear family system, and have the problems to an infringement of the equality of the sexes, § 36 in Korean Constitution. In addition, the 'Specially Related Person'　provision is the strict rule that emphasizes the regulation side. It is necessary for such provision to be established to rational rules system again newly. This study is aimed to figure out the problems and suggest improvement proposals as follows. The first, it is necessary to reduce the range of relatives to a certain degree by a principle of the equality of the sexes at least. In addition, the paternal line prescribed to 6 village is necessary to reduce in the rational range that considered nuclear family relations. The second, the approval of the board of directors of the finance investment supplier, there must be the prior agreement of all the director unlike the approval procedure of the board of directors in the general commercial law. However, this is the legislation which is very strict, and lacks of flexibility. This does not have the place that is different from giving veto to any authorized director after all. Necessity to be improved is seen in the degree to demand agreement more than board of directors two-thirds to give flexibility of the company decision while preventing the abuse possibility. The third, it is too wider the range of the relatives in report system about 5% rule and share change, so that cause the damage needlessly. For example, the range of the relatives with paternal line within 6 village assuming the economic entity, but the validity is doubt. Because the property right (a voting right) is limited and the criminal punishment can works too if someone neglect a report. Therefore, the balance between
the infringed does not match the secured of the benefit and protection of the law. The injunction to prohibit the voting right of the stocks which does not seem to be an appropriate remedy in the case of the violation that revision is possible by a correction report like as America's case law, Rondeau v. Mosinee Paper Corp., 422 U.S. 49 (1975). Supplement of the legislation is necessary for this. The fourth, the compulsory tender offer are to regulate that someone purchase the stocks which there is possibility of the control change in a short term negatively. The period called six months in the FSCMA is very long, and it is necessary to draw it
adequately. It is desirable to draw it on 60th day like regulation by the Japanese Financial Services and Markets Act. The fifth, a person of report duty for the possession situation is the officer or a main stockholder of a company whose stock is listed on the stock exchange. In an officer of here is included of person who instructs another person to perform duties in Korean Commercial Act article 401-2 (1). However, the validity is doubt whether such person who instructs another person to perform duties can be in charge of report duty practically. Therefore reconsideration of the legislation for this is necessary.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서 론
• Ⅱ. 자본시장법상 특수관계인 규정의 총론적 문제점
• Ⅲ. 자본시장법상 개별 특수관계인 규정의 문제점과 개선방안
• Ⅳ. 결 론

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 이전오, "특수관계인 관련 규제, 공정한가" 한국경제연구원 2004
• 2 김용진, "자본시장제도론" 율곡출판사 2007
• 3 김봉철, "자본시장법의 ‘특수관계인’ 관련 규정에 대한 비판적 검토" 한국경영법률학회 20 (20): 389-419, 2010
• 4 홍영만, "자본시장법 유권해석" 세경사 2009
• 5 김건식, "자본시장법" 두성사 2009
• 6 변제호, "자본시장법" 지원출판사 2009
• 7 이호영, "공정거래법상 특수관계인에 대한 부당지원행위의 규제" 행정법이론실무학회(行政法理論實務學會) 12 (12): 381-402, 2004
• 8 이준섭, "공개매수법에 관한 고찰" 18 (18): 1999
• 9 고창현, "개정증권거래법 검토" (248) : 1997
• 10 山地範明, "連結基礎槪念と連結會計基準の改訂" 2009
• 11 林在淵, "資本市場法" 박영사 2010
• 12 金建植, "資本市場法" 두성사 2009
• 13 鄭埈雨, "經濟法令上 特殊關係者規定의 妥當性 檢討-公正去來法을 中心으로-" 278 : 1999
• 14 兼田克幸, "公開買付制度の意義及び諸課題" 北海道大學 58 (58): 2008
• 15 William D. Andrews, "The Stockholder's Right to Equal Opportunity in The Sale of Shares" 78 : 505-, 1965
• 16 Lucian Arye Bebchuck, "The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards : Theory and Evidence and Policy" 54 : 887-, 2002
• 17 Robertw. Mcgee, "Commentary Information, Privilege, Opportunity And Insider Trading" 10 (10): 2-3, 1989