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
A number of finance holding companies have launched since the finance holding company law was enacted in 2000. Hereupon, the finance holding company law has the provisions to encourage competitiveness of finance industry by planning the sound operation of itself and its subsidiary company. Especially, in the case that the soundness of operation can be highly damaged by not following the criteria of operation guidelines, the Financial Supervisory Service may direct the measures for the improvement of operation, such as the presentation of operation improvement plans, the increase of capital and etc. However, in the case that the subsidiary bank's liabilities exceed its assets or goes into bankruptcy although the Financial Supervisory Service has forced to have the finance holding company, above all, the bank holding company done it, then the depositors as the creditors of the subsidiary bank will be badly damaged. Nevertheless, the present finance holding law has no provisions which directly give the bank holding company the responsibility of insolvent operation of the subsidiary bank.
According to the company law, a holding company is just a heavy stockholder of the subsidiary company, so that the direct responsibility of insolvent operation of it is not imposed on the holding company, based on the limited liability principles of a stockholder. However, the operation results of the holding company will be directly affected by those of the subsidiary company, so that the possibility of intervention in operating the subsidiary company can grow high. In addition, it is common that the finance holding company establishes company policy in the scale of a group, in order to make the subsidiary company follow it. Like this, in the case of the excessive intervention of the finance holding company in operating the subsidiary company, in particular, immoral situations, the limited liability principles of a stockholder can not be insisted. Therefore, the bank holding company shall take responsibility if it exercises the right of management over the subsidiary bank. Also, the bank holding company shall take responsibility of insolvent operation of the subsidiary bank, since the bank holding company has the regular advantages from the subsidiary bank.
In the case of USA, the bank holding company takes the responsibility of insolvent operation of the subsidiary bank, based on liability theories of major stockholders. It is difficult to apply these contents to our case as they are, in accordance with legal principles. Nevertheless, it is necessary that issue of imposing direct remedy for the unreliable subsidiary bank on the bank holding company should be positively examined, considering the influence of bank failure on national economy. On condition that incentive for entering into different types of business is maintained, and the purposes of improving industry's majority organization are considered, the points of issue shall be limited in the scope that the bank holding company can calculate a risk, although it is admitted that they are responsible for remedy.
According to the company law, a holding company is just a heavy stockholder of the subsidiary company, so that the direct responsibility of insolvent operation of it is not imposed on the holding company, based on the limited liability principles of a stockholder. However, the operation results of the holding company will be directly affected by those of the subsidiary company, so that the possibility of intervention in operating the subsidiary company can grow high. In addition, it is common that the finance holding company establishes company policy in the scale of a group, in order to make the subsidiary company follow it. Like this, in the case of the excessive intervention of the finance holding company in operating the subsidiary company, in particular, immoral situations, the limited liability principles of a stockholder can not be insisted. Therefore, the bank holding company shall take responsibility if it exercises the right of management over the subsidiary bank. Also, the bank holding company shall take responsibility of insolvent operation of the subsidiary bank, since the bank holding company has the regular advantages from the subsidiary bank.
In the case of USA, the bank holding company takes the responsibility of insolvent operation of the subsidiary bank, based on liability theories of major stockholders. It is difficult to apply these contents to our case as they are, in accordance with legal principles. Nevertheless, it is necessary that issue of imposing direct remedy for the unreliable subsidiary bank on the bank holding company should be positively examined, considering the influence of bank failure on national economy. On condition that incentive for entering into different types of business is maintained, and the purposes of improving industry's majority organization are considered, the points of issue shall be limited in the scope that the bank holding company can calculate a risk, although it is admitted that they are responsible for remedy.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 은행지주회사에 대한 규제이론
Ⅲ. 은행지주회사의 부실자은행에 대한 구제책임
Ⅳ. 맺음말
참고문헌
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (25)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문과 연관된 판례 (1)
-
대법원 2005. 1. 27. 선고 2002두5313 판결
[1] 법인의 주주는 법인에 대한 행정처분에 관하여 사실상이나 간접적인 이해관계를 가질 뿐이어서 스스로 그 처분의 취소를 구할 원고적격이 없는 것이 원칙이라고 할 것이지만, 그 처분으로 인하여 법인이 더 이상 영업 전부를 행할 수 없게 되고, 영업에 대한 인·허가의 취소 등을 거쳐 해산·청산되는 절차 또한 처분 당시 이미 예정되어 있으며,
자세히 보기
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
한국 금융지주회사법상 비은행지주회사에 대한 비교법적 연구 : 미국법제를 중심으로
비교사법
2011 .06
-
금융지주회사제도의 문제점과 개선방안
기업법연구
2013 .03
-
현행의 금융지주회사제도에 관한 소고
기업법연구
2004 .03
-
금융지주회사의 자회사 은행에 대한 자본확충에 관한 법리적 고찰
기업법연구
2009 .06
-
기술지주회사의 도입과 과세문제
법과 정책연구
2009 .01
-
보험지주회사 규제에 관한 소고
중앙법학
2009 .04
-
지주회사의 지휘권과 책임
기업법연구
2007 .12
-
지주회사에서 주주의 법적 이익보호와 이사의 책임문제
원광법학
2009 .01
-
대규모기업집단과 지주회사
지역사회연구
2011 .03
-
일본 보험지주회사 입법 그리고 한국 보험지주회사론
비교사법
2009 .06
-
持株會社의 經營支配構造에 관한 改善方案
기업법연구
2013 .12
-
중국 금융지주회사 감독시의 주요쟁점과 입법과제 －외국 법제도와의 비교론을 중심으로－
중국법연구
2011 .01
-
일본의 금융지주회사제도의 현황
기업법연구
2010 .03
-
공정거래법상 지주회사의 주요 추세와 특징-신설․존속 지주회사, 계열회사, 지주비율, 자산총액을 중심으로-
기업경영연구
2011 .01
-
사업자회사에 대한 지주회사 주주의 법적 지위 -주식교환이전에 의한 순수지주회사의 주주보호방안을 중심으로-
법과 정책연구
2006 .12
-
2011년 일본 회사법 개정안 중간시안에 관한 연구 : 모자회사 규율을 중심으로
한양법학
2012 .08
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-366-015562014