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
The executive officer system has been introduced by the Commercial Law revised in 2011. This system has several characteristics, as follows.
First, whether to implement the system depends on the company’s discretion. Second, the executive officer is responsible for the business execution, and the board of directors has the authority to elect and discharge of the executive officer, and to supervise their business execution as well. Therefore, for a company having the executive officer system, the executive officer is responsible for running the company, and the board of directors mainly takes a role of supervisory function.
Recently there is a trend to mandate the executive officer system to be implemented to listed companies. This article is a study that the mandatory implementation of the executive officer system by law is not recommendable because: 1) the executive officer system, as a typical business execution body, has not been mandatorily implemented by law in the United States or Japan; 2) considering complexity and diversity of business execution, it is highly recommended to give discretion to companies as to its implementation.
The board of directors of listed companies in Korea mainly consists of outside directors. If the implementation of executive officer system is mandated by law, the outside directors will eventually elect the executive officers responsible for running the company. Accordingly, apart from quasi-public finance institutions such as banks, it is not proper to require by law that outside directors appoint the executive officer even for private companies.
First, whether to implement the system depends on the company’s discretion. Second, the executive officer is responsible for the business execution, and the board of directors has the authority to elect and discharge of the executive officer, and to supervise their business execution as well. Therefore, for a company having the executive officer system, the executive officer is responsible for running the company, and the board of directors mainly takes a role of supervisory function.
Recently there is a trend to mandate the executive officer system to be implemented to listed companies. This article is a study that the mandatory implementation of the executive officer system by law is not recommendable because: 1) the executive officer system, as a typical business execution body, has not been mandatorily implemented by law in the United States or Japan; 2) considering complexity and diversity of business execution, it is highly recommended to give discretion to companies as to its implementation.
The board of directors of listed companies in Korea mainly consists of outside directors. If the implementation of executive officer system is mandated by law, the outside directors will eventually elect the executive officers responsible for running the company. Accordingly, apart from quasi-public finance institutions such as banks, it is not proper to require by law that outside directors appoint the executive officer even for private companies.
목차
Ⅰ. 서설
Ⅱ. 우리나라 집행임원제도의 특징과 도입의의
Ⅲ. 집행임원제도도입 의무화의 문제점
Ⅳ. 결론
참고문헌
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (1)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-360-002751913