지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
In 1936 New York became the first state to adopt a cash merger statute with the apparent intent of authorizing cash-out mergers. The legislation allowed a gas or electric company which owned ninety-five percent or more of a subsidiary's stock to merge with the subsidiary simply by filing a copy of the merger agreement with the secretary of state. After that time, many states adopted a cash merger regardless of kinds of companies.
With tills changes, not surprisingly, situations arise with some regularity in which the majority shareholders of a corporation wish to continue their participation in and control of the corporation's business willie terminating minority shareholders' participation in the enterprise in America, for more than 100 years, minority shareholders threatened with involuntary termination of their participation in a corporation have turned to the courts for assistance, claiming either that they should be allowed to continue their shareholder status or that they should receive more compensation than is being offered by the majority in return for relinquishing that status.
Hereupon, American lawmakers and courts have long grappled with the problem of how to protect minority shareholders in cash merger(freeze-out merger). Hereafter several principles started to established such as majority shareholder's fiduciary duty, entire fairness test, approval of minority shareholders and so on.
If Korea will adopt cash merger, some systems to protect these minority shareholders in cash merger need to be introduced in Commercial Code(or Securities Exchange Code), or established as judicial precedents.
Firstly, it is majority shareholder's fiduciary duty Majority shareholder's fiduciary duty can be divided into a direct fiduciary duty and an indirect fiduciary duty. The former is produced when majority shareholder exercise improperly control over the company not through its directors or officers, while the latter is happened when he exercise unfairly control over company's directors or its officers. The Korean Commercial Code revised in 1998 provides fiduciary duty for the latter's problem, not the former case Thus, an explicit provision relating to the direct fiduciary duty need to be stipulated to protecting the company and its minority shareholders from the majority shareholder's directly abused control.
Secondly, it is the entire fairness test American entire fairness test provides substantial protection to the minority in connection with oppression against minority shareholders. The entire fairness test requires a board of directors to comport with both standards of procedural fairness (fair dealing) and substantive fairness (fair price). Thus, the entire fairness test provides substantial protection to minority shareholders who are subjected to an explicit freezeout merger.
Thirdly, it is approval of minority shareholders Approval of minority shareholders of target company in cash merger may protect the minority shareholders.
With tills changes, not surprisingly, situations arise with some regularity in which the majority shareholders of a corporation wish to continue their participation in and control of the corporation's business willie terminating minority shareholders' participation in the enterprise in America, for more than 100 years, minority shareholders threatened with involuntary termination of their participation in a corporation have turned to the courts for assistance, claiming either that they should be allowed to continue their shareholder status or that they should receive more compensation than is being offered by the majority in return for relinquishing that status.
Hereupon, American lawmakers and courts have long grappled with the problem of how to protect minority shareholders in cash merger(freeze-out merger). Hereafter several principles started to established such as majority shareholder's fiduciary duty, entire fairness test, approval of minority shareholders and so on.
If Korea will adopt cash merger, some systems to protect these minority shareholders in cash merger need to be introduced in Commercial Code(or Securities Exchange Code), or established as judicial precedents.
Firstly, it is majority shareholder's fiduciary duty Majority shareholder's fiduciary duty can be divided into a direct fiduciary duty and an indirect fiduciary duty. The former is produced when majority shareholder exercise improperly control over the company not through its directors or officers, while the latter is happened when he exercise unfairly control over company's directors or its officers. The Korean Commercial Code revised in 1998 provides fiduciary duty for the latter's problem, not the former case Thus, an explicit provision relating to the direct fiduciary duty need to be stipulated to protecting the company and its minority shareholders from the majority shareholder's directly abused control.
Secondly, it is the entire fairness test American entire fairness test provides substantial protection to the minority in connection with oppression against minority shareholders. The entire fairness test requires a board of directors to comport with both standards of procedural fairness (fair dealing) and substantive fairness (fair price). Thus, the entire fairness test provides substantial protection to minority shareholders who are subjected to an explicit freezeout merger.
Thirdly, it is approval of minority shareholders Approval of minority shareholders of target company in cash merger may protect the minority shareholders.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 다양한 종류의 합병대가
Ⅲ. 약식ㆍ통상합병과 소수주주보호
Ⅳ. 결론(시사점)
♣ 참고문헌
참고문헌 (16)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
2011년 개정 상법상 소수주식 강제매수제도
강원법학
2012 .02
-
미국 회사법상 “소수주주 축출의 정당성”에 관한 고찰 : “완전공정기준”을 중심으로
기업법연구
2007 .12
-
개정상법상 현금지급합병제도에 관한 연구
경영법률
2011 .01
-
소수주주 축출제도 도입에 따른 소수주주 보호와 공정한 가격산정 기준
동북아법연구
2012 .01
-
개정상법상 소수주주축출제도에 관한 연구
경영법률
2012 .01
-
주주행동주의 규제를 위한 충실의무 적용에 관한 연구
비교사법
2009 .03
-
상법과 증권거래법상의 소수주주권과 그 문제점
한양법학
2007 .08
-
지배주주의 권리와 책임
한양법학
2008 .06
-
지배주주의 주식매도청구권의 운용과 관련된 몇 가지 제언
경영법률
2011 .01
-
주주의 충실의무
경영법률
2014 .01
-
소수주주의 권리강화를 위한 제도 개선방안 -회계장부열람청구권을 중심으로-
경영법률
2010 .01
-
소수주주의 법적 보호에 관한 검토
원광법학
2007 .01
-
현물배당과 교부금합병을 통한 기업구조조정에 대한 소고
법학연구
2012 .11
-
소수주주의 주식매수청구권 박탈로 인한 주주총회결의의 무효 여부 : 대법원 2010. 7. 22. 선고 2008다37193 판결(분할합병무효 등)을 중심으로
기업법연구
2011 .09
-
支配株主의 行爲基準 : 미국 판례법상 신인의무이론을 중심으로
법학연구
2006 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
기업결합 형성단계에 있어서 주주의 보호
강대섭
법학연구
2011
.12
반대주주의 주식매수청구권에 관한 연구
양기진
기업법연구
2012
.03
자본시장법과 개정 상법 시행 후 상장법인을 둘러싼 제도의 변화 및 주의할 점
이상훈
법·제도
2009
.03
소수주주들이 주식매수청구권 행사시 기회를 갖지 못한 것만으로는 이 사건 분할합병을 무효라고 할 수 없다 : 대법원 2010.7.22.선고2008다37193판결 (분할합병무효 등)
이상훈
법·제도
2010
.12
미국 델라웨어주법상 합병시의 소수파주주 보호
김재형
비교사법
2002
.12
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-366-014333960