메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국경영법률학회 경영법률 경영법률 제25권 제3호
발행연도
2015.1
수록면
1 - 36 (36page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Perpetual securities in this article are kinds of hybrid securities which are issued in the form of bond but do not have actual maturity. This has been issued with the name of “new capital instrument” (namely, hybrid capital instrument) by banks since 2003 in Korea according to the guideline of Basel Committee. Commercial companies, however, started to issue similar perpetual securities from 2013, and these issues prompted argument regarding the distinction between debt and equity. Korea Accounting Standards Board(KASB) classified those securities as equity, though they are still classified as debt in legal perspective. Considering this disharmony, it is necessary to review traditional dichotomous approach to legal concept of bond and stock or debt and equity. When defining the nature of securities, legal scholars traditionally suggested factors such as power to participate in management, maturity and obligation of repayment, the type of return on investment, and liquidation preference. Non of these factors, however, are conclusive to distinguish bond from stock because of diverse hybrid securities like perpetual securities. Reflecting this circumstance, this article argues that legislative policy needs to be changed in order to embrace the issuance of diverse hybrid securities. As to commercial law and securities law in Korea, legal scholars commonly agree to not allow the issuance of securities that are not clearly stipulated in law. This attitude is, however, difficult to be maintained under current financial market.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (15)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0