중국 국유기업과 한국 공기업 개념의 비교 연구 - 양국 현행법 규정을 중심으로 (A Comparative Study on SOEs of China and Korea - Focusing on China and Korea's existing law systems)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국외국어대학교 중국연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 중국연구 / 64권 / 243 ~ 270페이지
· 저자명 : 김인식

초록

중국 국유기업과 한국 공기업은 매우 유사하면서도 차이점을 갖는 실체이다. 본 논문은 이렇게 비슷하면서도 다른 중국 국유기업과 한국 공기업을 비교하여 그 공통점과 차이점을 명확하게 분석하였다. 중국 국유기업과 한국 공기업은 국가가 직, 간접적으로 소유한다는 점, 최소한의 독립적 의사결정능력과 생산능력을 갖춘 기업실체라는 점 및 기업활동의 공공성을 가진다는 점에서 공통점을 가진다. 그러나 첫째, 한국과 달리 중국 국유기업은 공공성을 필수적 요건으로 하고 있지 않다는 점, 둘째 기업활동 전체를 규범화하고 있는 한국과 달리 중국은 철저하게 자산관리 중심의 통칙법을 두고 있다는 점, 셋째 한국 공기업과 중국 국유기업 개념 범위에 차이가 있다는 점 등에서 차이가 있다.

영어초록

The State-Owned Enterprises of China and Korea are very similar entities but they are not perfectly the same. SOEs in both countries are the entities which government are their stakeholder. Both of them are somewhat independent in their business activities and they are controlled and supervised by government under related regulations. Both of them are facing similar problems such as low efficiency of management, inflexible system etc. Naturally, solutions regarding these problems are similar too. However, government's ownership and commerciality are most important characters of Chinese SOEs. On the other hand, public interests are the core value of Korean SOEs. So their concrete notion and scope of SOEs are not exactly the same.
The noticeable differences between Chinese and Korean SOEs are; first, Chinese SOEs are in charge of public interests, but according to existing law, there are almost no institutional systems to guarantee SOEs' public role. In order to ensure stable activity of Chinese SOEs in public sector, it is very important to supplement institutional shortcomings.
Second, there are significant differences in logical structures between the general laws about SOEs: 'Law on State-owned Assets of Enterprises'(China) and 'Act on the Management of Public Institutions'(Korea). Chinese law model is for controlling and managing state assets, especially assets of enterprise. It means there is no need to determine whether an enterprise is a SOE or not. The government can control and manage its own assets of whatever the enterprise is. On the other hand, Korean law model is for controlling and managing SOEs' activity. If the enterprise or the institute is designated as a 'public institute', it has to owe some duty to report management condition etc. And if it isn't designated as a 'public institute', the government doesn't have any laws, regulations or minimum standards regarding such situation. Chinese model is good for managing SOEs' assets efficiently; Korean's model is better for managing SOEs' public characters.
Lastly, some Chinese SOEs already became global companies. Generally, government intervention has had negative influence upon SOEs' performances. However, some Chinese SOEs achieved significant success. Meanwhile, the Korean government and also the academic society are reviewing of the SOEs' past privatization. And they are finding more flexible, various style of SOEs' reform. Chinese government's experience of managing enterprises could be meaningful implication for Korean SOEs' further reform.

참고자료

· 없음