当前位置:主页 > 法律论文 > 商法论文 >

中韩异议股东股份回购请求权制度比较研究

发布时间:2018-01-31 11:22

  本文关键词: 异议股东 股份回购请求权 价格评估 行使程序 出处:《延边大学》2009年硕士论文 论文类型:学位论文


【摘要】: 股东利益的保护是公司治理的核心问题,而对少数股东利益的保护更是保护股东权益的关键所在。作为一项保护中小股东利益的重要制度——异议股东股份回购请求权制度在公司制度初创时期,公司决策一般实行“一致同意原则”。但随着公司制度的发展,“资本多数决原则”逐渐替代了“一致同意原则”。由于“资本多数决原则”存在“合法”的侵犯或者排挤中小股东的固有缺陷。因此,保护少数股东的意愿和投资自由,保障其合法权利并防止资本多数决原则的滥用逐渐成为公司立法的重要目标价值,由此催生了异议股东股份回购请求权制度。 随着我国市场经济的日益发展,公司重大交易日渐频繁活跃,建立和完善股东利益保护机制的呼声越来越高。在实践中已经反映出对异议股东股份回购请求权的现实需求。但2005年修改《公司法》之前,我国对该项制度研究领域上几乎是一个空白,唯独在《上市公司章程指引》和《到境外上市公司必备条款》这两个法律效率较低的规范性文件中略有涉及。这次修订的《公司法》正式以法律的形式将异议股东股份回购请求权规定了下来,这无疑是一个重大的进步。但在具体操作过程中的适用情形、权利主体、行使程序、对异议股东股份价格评估等方面新公司法及相关法律、法规中并没有具体规定。目前亦无相关的司法解释出台,这些问题有待在司法实践中加以解决和完善。 韩国异议股东股份回购请求权制度已历经50余年,并且形成了大量的成文法和判例法,该制度的各个细节也在50多年的实践和争论中日益完备。在商法中以明文形式规定了适用情形和行使程序并且在判例法中对几种典型的权利主体作了定性,成文法及判例法也提供了价格评估的比较完整的依据。 本文以异议股东股份回购请求权的基本理论为出发点,结合我国的现实国情及立法现状用比较的方法对该制度的适用情形、权利主体、行使程序、价格评估等具体内容进行了系统分析,并介绍韩国先进立法经验的基础上,笔者主张我国异议股东股份回购请求权应借鉴韩国异议股东股份回购请求权的相关内容,比如:在适用情形方面应制定判断标准,即公司行为必须是对公司产生根本性变更而且股东的地位和股东之间的利害关系产生重大影响;权利主体方面应肯定无表决权股东和出资瑕疵股东的股份回购请求权资格,应否定继受股东的股份回购请求权资格;行使程序应增加相关的内容,即公司的告知义务,异议股东提出书面回购请求的义务,异议股份提存于公司之义务,异议股东无需在股东大会投反对票等内容;价格评估中应采用确定要素,程序,模式,费用负担等内容,并制定合理的双轨价格评估机制来完善我国异议股东股份回购请求权制度的一些设想。
[Abstract]:The protection of shareholders' interests is the core issue of corporate governance. The protection of minority shareholders' interests is the key to protect shareholders' rights and interests. As an important system to protect the interests of minority shareholders, the system of claim for share repurchase of dissenting shareholders is in the initial period of the company system. Generally speaking, the principle of "unanimous consent" is applied in corporate decision-making. However, with the development of corporate system. The principle of capital majority decision has gradually replaced the principle of unanimous consent. As a result, the principle of capital majority decision has the inherent defects of "lawful" invasion or exclusion of minority shareholders. Protecting minority shareholders' will and investment freedom, safeguarding their legal rights and preventing the abuse of capital majority principle gradually become the important target value of company legislation. This gave birth to the system of dissenting shareholders' right to repurchase shares. With the development of the market economy in our country, the major transactions of the company become more and more active day by day. The voice of establishing and perfecting the protection mechanism of shareholders' interests is more and more high. In practice, it has already reflected the realistic demand of the claim right of dissenting shareholders' share repurchase. But before the amendment of Company Law in 2005. There is almost a blank in the field of research on this system in our country. Only in the "guidelines of the articles of Association of listed companies" and "the necessary provisions to overseas listed companies", these two legal inefficient normative documents are slightly involved. The revised Company Law formally forms the dissenting shares in the form of law. The right of claim for repurchase of East shares has been stipulated. This is undoubtedly a significant progress, but in the specific operation of the application of the situation, the subject of rights, exercise procedures, price evaluation of dissenting shareholders and other aspects of the new company law and related laws. There are no specific provisions in the statute and there are no relevant judicial interpretations. These problems need to be solved and perfected in judicial practice. The system of claim for share repurchase of dissenting shareholders in Korea has gone through more than 50 years, and has formed a large number of statutory law and case law. The details of the system are increasingly complete in more than 50 years of practice and controversy. In commercial law, the application and exercise procedures are stipulated in clear form and several typical subjects of rights are characterized in case law. Statutory law and case law also provide a more complete basis for price assessment. This paper takes the basic theory of dissenting shareholders' right to repurchase shares as the starting point, combining with the reality of our country and the current situation of legislation to compare the application of the system, the subject of rights, and the procedure of exercising the system. Price evaluation and other specific content of a systematic analysis, and the introduction of Korea's advanced legislative experience on the basis of. The author advocates that the right of share repurchase of dissenting shareholders in our country should draw lessons from the relevant contents of the right of repurchase of shares of Korean dissenting shareholders, such as: in the applicable situation, the judgment standard should be established. That is, the behavior of the company must have a fundamental change to the company, and the position of the shareholders and the interests of the shareholders have a significant impact; The right subject should affirm the claim qualification of the non-voting shareholder and the defective shareholder of capital contribution, and deny the claim qualification of the share repurchase right of the successor shareholder. The relevant contents should be added to the procedure, that is, the company's obligation to inform the company, the obligation of the dissenting shareholders to submit written repurchase requests, the obligation of the dissenting shares to be deposited in the company, and the dissenting shareholders' need not vote against the shareholders' general meeting. In price evaluation, we should adopt certain elements, procedures, models, cost burden and so on, and formulate a reasonable two-track price evaluation mechanism to perfect the system of claim for share repurchase by dissenting shareholders in China.
【学位授予单位】:延边大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2009
【分类号】:D912.29

【参考文献】

相关期刊论文 前10条

1 卞江,徐向艺;异议股东股份价值评估权在股份公司中的适用性研究[J];东岳论丛;2004年04期

2 甘培忠;有限责任公司小股东利益保护的法学思考——从诉讼视角考察[J];法商研究;2002年06期

3 林晓镍,清华大学法学院;股份买取请求权初探[J];法学杂志;1999年06期

4 姜惠琴;;董事对第三人责任[J];法学杂志;2006年06期

5 周凯军;论资本多数决及其限制──为了少数股股东的利益[J];河北法学;2000年01期

6 陈丽娟;;论公司并购中少数股东权益的法律保护[J];化工技术经济;2006年02期

7 王远明,阎珊珊;构建我国异议股东股份收买请求权制度的思考[J];湖湘论坛;2005年06期

8 朱慈蕴;资本多数决原则与控制股东的诚信义务[J];法学研究;2004年04期

9 蔡立东;公司治理中的“多数派暴政”问题[J];法制与社会发展;2003年05期

10 张民安;公司契约理论研究[J];现代法学;2003年02期

相关重要报纸文章 前2条

1 黄安生 (中国人民大学法学院教授) 郑小敏 (中国人民大学法学院博士研究生);[N];法制日报;2005年

2 刘敏;[N];人民法院报;2003年

相关硕士学位论文 前7条

1 刘静;股份评估补偿权法律制度研究[D];对外经济贸易大学;2004年

2 金少平;论我国公司法上异议股东股份回购请求权制度的建立[D];武汉大学;2005年

3 吴玛丽;异议股东股份回购请求权制度研究[D];华中师范大学;2006年

4 王晶;异议股东股份回购请求权研究[D];中国政法大学;2006年

5 金晓峰;论异议股东股份回购请求权[D];华东政法学院;2006年

6 金美兰;韩国异议股东股份回购请求权制度研究[D];吉林大学;2007年

7 李娜;股份公司异议股东股份回购请求权制度探讨[D];吉林大学;2007年



本文编号:1478952

资料下载
论文发表

本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/sflw/1478952.html


Copyright(c)文论论文网All Rights Reserved | 网站地图 |

版权申明:资料由用户86300***提供,本站仅收录摘要或目录,作者需要删除请E-mail邮箱bigeng88@qq.com