Earticle

초록

영어

Directors, including chief executive officers, are employees who execute tasks within the company, and must abide by their responsibilities to carry out their fiduciary duties for the company’s benefit. During the 1997 financial crisis, citizens realized that a director’s management has significant influence in the company’s existence and furthermore can negatively impact the nation’s economy. Therefore, when management failure can be traced to a director’s pursuit of personal benefits and immorality, social demands are rising to hold them accountable for civil responsibility, and if it calls for further condemnation, indict them with criminal charges such as breach of trust. On the contrary, some claim that it is excessive to charge a director with criminal responsibility when the failure stems from an executive decision that was made for the company’s benefit based on reasonable evidence. If company directors are held liable by special breach of trust charges regarding their management activities within corporate law, such application will restrict autonomy and creativity in corporate management and shrink economic activity. This can result in significant damages to corporations and the nation’s economy, and thus it is necessary to consider the business judgement rule when holding a director accountable for not only civil but also criminal responsibility. When looking at the economic reality of Korea, executives appointed under the influence of chaebol leaders frequently commit illegal offenses to pursue private interests even to this day. Therefore, rather than eliminating the crime of special breach of trust, the law must be revised to be more clear in specifying the factors that establish the indictment to ensure the autonomy and creativity of corporate management. The crime of special breach of trust was implemented in commercial law in addition to breach of trust in criminal law to aggravate punishment for directors who commit such offenses and take a preventive effect. However, because both statutory punishments are defined the same, the crime of special breach of trust fails to achieve its legislative intent and therefore, I believe it is appropriate to raise the penalty for the latter charge.

한국어

대표이사를 포함한 이사는 회사에서 업무를 집행하는 자로서 선량한 관리자의 주의로써 업무를 처리하여야 하고 회사를 위하여 그 직무를 충실하게 수행하여야 한다. 이사의 경영실패가 회사의 존립에 큰 영향을 미치며 나아가서는 국가경제에 악영향을 미친다는 것을 1997년의 외환위기 때에 많은 국민들이 느끼게 되었다. 상법은 회사제도의 오‧남용과 주식회사의 경영인들에 의한 임무위반행위가 회사의 이해관계자에게 광범위한 피해를 발생시킬 수 있기 있기 때문에 배임행위에 대하여 형사책임을 지우는 특별배임죄를 규정하고 있다. 회사의 이사 등의 경영활동에 대하여 회사법상의 특별배임죄가 적용된다면 기업경영의 자율성과 창의성을 제약하고 경영활동을 위축시키게 된다. 그로 인하여 기업과 국가경제에 큰 손실을 초래 할 수 있으므로 민사상 책임뿐만 아니라 형사상 책임을 지울 때도 경영판단의 원칙을 고려하여 결정할 필요가 있다.

목차

요약
 Ⅰ. 서설
 Ⅱ. 주식회사의 이사의 법적 지위와 책임
 Ⅲ. 이사 등의 배임행위와 특별배임죄
 Ⅳ. 회사법상 특별배임죄와 경영판단의 원칙
 Ⅴ. 이사 등의 경영행위에 대한 배임죄 적용의 배제에 관한 논의
 Ⅵ. 결어
 참고문헌
 

키워드

저자

• 권상로 [ Kwon, Sang-Ro | 조선대학교 법과대학 교수. ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  동북아법연구 [Northeast Asian law journal]

• 간기

  연3회

• pISSN

  1976-5037

• 수록기간

  2007~2026

• 등재여부

  KCI 등재

• 십진분류

  KDC 369 DDC 341