注册资本认缴制度下资本充实责任的困境与探讨

发布时间：2018-08-29 14:04

【摘要】：14年3月1日,公司法最新一轮的修正案正式实施。本次修订的公司法真的重点在于资本制度的改革,主要涉及了与资本制度相关的三个方面:一是将注册资本从实缴制改为了认缴制,二是放宽了注册资本的相关登记条件,三是在公司登记事项上进行了一定程度的简化。其中注册资本方面的变革尤其值得注意,本次公司法的修改使得我国注册资本的实质发生了根本性的改变,从一定意义上说,我国新的公司法修正案剥离了法定资本制的一些根本性原则而转向了更为由私法自治所引领的授权资本制领域,其目的在于通过降低公司准入门槛从而促进商事活动的进一步发展。需要注意的是,尽管公司注册资本制度受到了诸多的质疑,但是公司注册资本作为公司资本信用的逻辑起点对于公司信用的保障作用依然不容忽视,一旦注册资本的相关规则发生改变,那么,与注册资本相关的其他配套规则的适用范畴必然也会受其影响。“资本信用”的直接体现是“资本三原则”,即资本确定、资本维持和资本不变,该三原则,被大陆法系国家所奉行,成为大陆法系国家公司法的一项核心内容。注册资本制度的改变,自当会影响到资本三原则在实践的适用。资本维持原则,也即资本充实原则,作为唯一连接形式与实质的资本性原则,受到本次公司法关于注册资本修改的冲击同样巨大,这也给本文的写作留下了充足的讨论余地——暨探讨资本充实责任在注册资本发生实质性变更的情况下其在实践中的适用是否仍具有合理性。本文的引言主要阐述了本文所研究的命题提出的背景及作为当下公司法热点问题所引起的一些理论界探讨,表明公司法的本次变革尤其是对公司注册资本制度的相关修正在理论界引起了广泛的关注。本文的第一部分是对于命题在语境意义上的梳理,首先探讨了公司法本次改革的目的在于通过降低公司准入门槛促进公司设立行为(即促进潜在的发起人发起设立公司),通过取消最低注册资本、注册资本缴纳时限等规范以降低公司发起人设立公司行为的交易成本,也就是说,潜在的公司发起人是本次公司法修正案所要激励的主要对象之一;其次,我们注意到,本次公司法修正案的主要改革标的是公司注册资本制度,即将注册资本实缴制改为注册资本认缴制,其修改理由为公司资本作为一种静态的初始的信用体现在实践中对于债权人的保护作用有限,而注册资本的出资主体是作为初始公司设立的发起人,也就是说,公司发起人成为了公司注册资本制度改革的最大影响主体;最后,由于资本制度的实质性变更,使得包括资本充实原则在内的公司三原则的适用框架出现了变化,传统意义上而言,资本充实原则似乎是公司法为了保障外部性债权之利益而特定设立之规范,但是一旦涉及到责任承担的问题,责任承担的主体同样需要我们关注,基于我国公司法对于资本充实责任的规定,我国发起人所要承担的资本充实责任是一种无过错的连带责任,理论上说属于一种较为严苛的归责形态。因此,发起人作为本次公司法所要促进之对象、本次公司法修改所影响巨大之承受者及资本充实责任的责任承担主体,自当成为了本文所要探讨的主要切入点,从发起人的角度,看本次公司法修正案通过注册资本制度的改革对资本充实责任的适用产生的影响及基于探讨消除该影响所可能选择的解决路径。本文的第二部分,是探讨在本次公司法修改之前,资本充实责任在发起人之间的适用情形,通过公司的类型化区分对发起人所要承担的资本充实责任进行阐述和归纳总结,得出即使在公司法修改之前,发起人的资本充实责任,由于其归责的严苛性,已经具有了一定对发起人的压迫性倾向,然而受益于我国较为严格的注册资本制度,可以保障发起人不会因为这一压迫性而产生对设立公司行为的忧虑,也就是说,本次公司法修正案实施之前的公司注册资本制度对于发起人的资本充实责任承担起到了一定的缓冲剂的作用。本文的第三部分,是探讨在本次公司法修改之后,即注册资本制度发生实质性变更之后,资本充实责任的适用困境,通过具体案例的分析表明发起人丧失了注册资本实缴制度的相关保护后,已经很难通过有效途径去取得其他发起人的出资信用能力,但却仍然要与那些“不明所以”的其他发起人承担连带的无过错的资本充实责任。另一方面,通过情景分析,当发起人既缺乏公司法对于注册资本的规定从而确保其他发起人的出资信用渠道,又在当下无法寻求有效的其他途径去了解其他发起人的出资信用,其只能有两个选择,一个是承担超出根据有限责任之原则的自身投资额的责任去设立公司;二是基于机会主义的考虑而选择放弃公司设立行为,显然这两种选择皆非我国公司法立法者所乐于见到之情形。第四部分通过对公司宗旨和公司基本原则的阐述确定公司在商事活动中究竟要发挥何种功能,降低交易成本与行为的确定性是公司作为近现代商事活动中最为重要的组织体的原因所在,因此,各国公司法的修改皆不应偏离其根本的轨道,由公司宗旨所引发的公司法的基本原则自当是公司法最高位阶的一般性原则,所有的公司法具体规范应在其基本原则的范畴下进行适用,当二者发生位阶冲突时,高位阶原则自当优先适用。然而,在本次公司法修该后,如果仍然按照现行法律适用资本充实原则,显然明显的违背了有限责任这一公司法的基本原则,从而会引发发起人设立公司行为的不确定性与对机会主义的担忧,这显然与公司的宗旨是违背的。第五部分通过借鉴国外的相关法规,尤其是日本的法规对基于上述情况所出现的资本充实责任的适用困境提出相应的解决路径,从外部性而言,通过一定的有效途径增加社会信用,从内部性而言,则要借鉴日本公司法对资本充实原则的归责形态做出一定的变更。
[Abstract]:On March 1, 14, the latest round of amendments to the Company Law was formally implemented. This amendment really focuses on the reform of the capital system, mainly involving three aspects related to the capital system: first, the change of the registered capital from the paid-in system to the subscription system; second, the relaxation of the relevant registration conditions of the registered capital; third, the registration of the company. Among them, the change of registered capital is particularly noteworthy. The amendment of the Company Law has made a fundamental change in the essence of registered capital in China. In a sense, the new amendment of the Company Law has stripped away some fundamental principles of the statutory capital system and turned to a more radical one. The purpose of authorized capital system led by private law autonomy is to promote the further development of commercial activities by lowering the threshold of corporate access. Once the rules of registered capital are changed, the scope of application of other supporting rules related to registered capital will be affected. The direct embodiment of "capital credit" is the "three principles of capital": capital determination, capital maintenance and capital unchanged. These three principles are adopted by civil law countries. The change of the system of registered capital will affect the application of the three principles of capital in practice. The principle of capital maintenance, that is, the principle of capital enrichment, as the only form of connection with the substantive principle of capital, is also impacted by the revision of the company law on registered capital. The introduction of this paper mainly expounds the background of the propositions proposed in this paper and the current hot issues of corporate law. The first part of this paper is to sort out the propositions in a contextual sense. First, it discusses the purpose of the reform of the company law to promote the entry of companies by lowering the threshold. In order to reduce the transaction cost of establishing a company by canceling the minimum registered capital and the time limit for the payment of registered capital, the potential sponsors are one of the main objects to be encouraged by the amendment of the Company Law. It is noted that the main object of this amendment is the system of registered capital, that is, the system of paid-in registered capital is changed to the system of subscribed registered capital. The reason for the amendment is that as a static initial credit, corporate capital has limited protection for creditors in practice, while the investor of registered capital is the investor. The initiator of the initial company, that is to say, the initiator of the company has become the most influential subject of the reform of the registered capital system; finally, due to the substantial change of the capital system, the applicable framework of the three principles of the company, including the principle of capital enrichment, has changed. Traditionally speaking, the principle of capital enrichment seems to be the most influential one. The corporation law is a specific norm established to protect the interests of external creditor's rights. But when it comes to the issue of liability, the subject of liability also needs our attention. Theoretically speaking, it belongs to a more rigorous form of imputation. Therefore, as the promoter of the company law to promote the object, the impact of the amendment of the company law and the responsibility of the subject of capital enrichment, as the main entry point of this article to explore, from the perspective of the promoter, to see the company law amendment The second part of this paper is to discuss the application of the capital enrichment liability between the sponsors before the amendment of the company law, and to start from the typification of the company. This paper expounds and summarizes the responsibility of capital enrichment that a person has to bear, and draws a conclusion that even before the amendment of the Company Law, the sponsor's responsibility for capital enrichment, because of the severity of its imputation, has a certain tendency to oppress the sponsor. However, benefiting from the stricter registered capital system in China, the sponsor can be guaranteed against the cause. The third part of this article is to discuss the issue of the registered capital system after the amendment of the company law. After substantial changes, the plight of the application of capital enrichment liability, through the analysis of specific cases show that the sponsor has lost the protection of the registered capital payment system, it is difficult to obtain other sponsors through effective ways to obtain the credit ability of capital contribution, but still with those "unknown" other sponsors to bear the company. On the other hand, through scenario analysis, when the sponsor is lack of the provisions of the company law on registered capital to ensure that other sponsors of the investment credit channel, and at the moment can not find an effective way to understand the other sponsors of the investment credit, there are only two options, one is to undertake. It is obvious that neither of the two choices is a pleasure for the legislators of our company law to see. The fourth part defines the company through the elaboration of the company's purpose and the company's basic principles. What kind of function should be played in commercial activities and the certainty of transaction cost and behavior is the reason why the company is the most important organization in modern commercial activities. Therefore, the revision of the company law in various countries should not deviate from its fundamental track. The basic principle of the company law caused by the company tenet should be the company law. The general principle of the highest rank, all the specific norms of the company law should be applied in the scope of its basic principles, when there is a conflict of rank between the two, the high rank principle should be applied preferentially. This basic principle of the company law will lead to the uncertainty of the sponsor's behavior of setting up the company and the worry about opportunism, which is obviously contrary to the purpose of the company. The fifth part puts forward the predicament of applying the relevant foreign laws and regulations, especially the Japanese laws and regulations to the capital enrichment liability based on the above situation. Corresponding solutions, from the externality, through a certain effective way to increase social credit, from the internality, we should draw lessons from the Japanese Company Law on the principle of capital enrichment to make certain changes in the form of imputation.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D922.291.91

【相似文献】