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.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2013.12
- 수록면
- 181 - 212 (32page)
- DOI
- 10.35505/sjlb.2013.12.3.2.181
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
July 17, 2013 , Department of Justice noticed some legislation amendment bill to the Commercial Code. The main contents are as follows. 1) Audit Committee shall be elected separately from the existing directors. 2) Compulsory Executive Officer election. 3) To protect minority shareholders, mandated electronic voting system and the cumulative voting system. Subsidiary, Multiple derivative suit system, the shareholders of the parent company to pursue the liability to company"s director, was imposed.
After IMF financial rescue in 1997 audit committee system was introduced from the reflection on the existing audit system. Phase at the time of adoption, effectiveness of the audit committee has been controversial. The reason why audit Committee was bottom Committee of the Board of Directors within, compared to the audit system taking on it"s position in parallel to the existing Managing Director.
In this paper, first, to find out about each Amendment associated with the audit committee system, and a summary of the audit committee system which is defined by the current Commercial Code.
Secondly, in respect of the interpretation and adoption to the company, comparing the audit committee system which was regulated in the Capital Market and Financial Investment Service Act(Capital Market Act) and the audit committee system in the Commercial Code. Especially the problem which Capital Market Act apply the only Section 2, 3 of article 409 the Commercial Code is controversial. Therefore it was studied that the difference applying an audit committee system according to each company"s asset or working capital is not effective considering various financial investment company.
Finally, we examined separately two ways about the audit committee system to be changed due to the revision of the Commercial Code in 2013. First, mandates cumulative voting system and separation election of the audit committee. Second mandated executive officers system.
In this paper, it was favor that the audit committee system and executive officers work in the framework of one audit committee system. At the same time, suggested that uniform standard is necessary in terms of diversity of the Corporation.
After IMF financial rescue in 1997 audit committee system was introduced from the reflection on the existing audit system. Phase at the time of adoption, effectiveness of the audit committee has been controversial. The reason why audit Committee was bottom Committee of the Board of Directors within, compared to the audit system taking on it"s position in parallel to the existing Managing Director.
In this paper, first, to find out about each Amendment associated with the audit committee system, and a summary of the audit committee system which is defined by the current Commercial Code.
Secondly, in respect of the interpretation and adoption to the company, comparing the audit committee system which was regulated in the Capital Market and Financial Investment Service Act(Capital Market Act) and the audit committee system in the Commercial Code. Especially the problem which Capital Market Act apply the only Section 2, 3 of article 409 the Commercial Code is controversial. Therefore it was studied that the difference applying an audit committee system according to each company"s asset or working capital is not effective considering various financial investment company.
Finally, we examined separately two ways about the audit committee system to be changed due to the revision of the Commercial Code in 2013. First, mandates cumulative voting system and separation election of the audit committee. Second mandated executive officers system.
In this paper, it was favor that the audit committee system and executive officers work in the framework of one audit committee system. At the same time, suggested that uniform standard is necessary in terms of diversity of the Corporation.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 현행 감사위원회 제도 개괄
Ⅲ. 금융투자회사에서 감사위원회 제도 적용에 따른 문제점
Ⅳ. 2013년 상법 개정안의 감사위원회 제도 검토
Ⅳ. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문과 연관된 판례 (1)
-
대전지방법원 2006. 3. 14.자 2006카합242 결정
[1] 상법 및 증권거래법상 주주제안권, 사외이사후보추천위원회제도 등의 입법 경위 및 그 취지 등에 비추어 볼 때, 상법상 주주제안권과 증권거래법상 주주의 사외이사후보추천권은 그 행사요건과 내용 등을 달리하고 있으므로, 소수주주들로서는 주권상장법인의 사외이사후보추천을 총회의 의제 또는 의안으로 삼고자 하는 경우에 상법상의 주주제안권 또는 증
자세히 보기
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2015-300-001129951