PARTNER
검증된 파트너 제휴사 자료

소수주주의 주식매수청구권 박탈로 인한 주주총회결의의 무효 여부 - 대법원 2010. 7. 22. 선고 2008다37193 판결(분할합병무효 등)을 중심으로 - (Determination Whether Depriving Minority Shareholders of Appraisal Rights Makes Resolution At Shareholders' Meeting Void)

23 페이지
기타파일
최초등록일 2025.04.16 최종저작일 2011.09
23P 미리보기
소수주주의 주식매수청구권 박탈로 인한 주주총회결의의 무효 여부 - 대법원 2010. 7. 22. 선고 2008다37193 판결(분할합병무효 등)을 중심으로 -
  • 미리보기

    서지정보

    · 발행기관 : 한국기업법학회
    · 수록지 정보 : 기업법연구 / 25권 / 3호 / 95 ~ 117페이지
    · 저자명 : 김성진

    초록

    When there are certain fundamental corporate changes, appraisal rights provide dissenting shareholders the option to sell their shares back to the corporation for fair value. Examples of fundamental corporate changes are following; mergers, acquisition, divisions-mergers, consolidations, serious charter amendments, sales of substantially all the corporation's assets and so on. The purpose of appraisal rights is to protect minority shareholders who do not want fundamental changes nor be forced to invest in new corporations against their free will.
    If proposed corporate action for fundamental corporate changes requiring appraisal rights becomes effective, the corporation must give a notice to all shareholders who are entitled to assert appraisal rights before shareholders' meeting. However, in the Supreme Court's case(대법원 2010. 7. 22. 선고 2008다37193 판결), minority shareholders who held about 9% of the total corporation's shares were deprived of their appraisal rights because the corporation missed to give them a notice about fundamental corporate changes requiring appraisal rights before shareholders' meeting. Superior court of New Jersey in Applestein v. United Board & Carton Corp., held that majority shareholders, no matter however overwhelming it may turn out to be, may not deprive appraisal rights of minority shareholders, no matter how few they may be in number. Like this decision, the dissenting shareholders have right to object to corporation's plan and obtain appraisal right of their respective shares. To do so, the corporation should have given minority shareholders (no matter how few they may be in number) a notice about fundamental corporate changes requiring appraisal rights before shareholders' meeting.
    This article focuses on discussing whether defects which deprived minority shareholders of appraisal rights make resolution at shareholders' meeting void or voidable. Part II reviews detail facts of the Supreme Court's case to clarify the issues of this article. This part also overviews history and role of dissenter's appraisal rights and finds out that shareholders in division-merger cases are able to have statutory appraisal rights like shareholders in merger cases. Part III addresses whether defects which deprived minority shareholders of appraisal rights make resolution at shareholders' meeting void or voidable under the Supreme Court's case laws. Part IV discusses whether defects which deprived minority shareholders of appraisal rights make resolution at shareholders' meeting void or voidable under the U.S. case laws. Part V compares the Supreme Court's case with another Supreme Court's case(대법원 1993. 10. 12. 선고 92다28235, 28242 판결) which is factually similar to the former. Lastly, part VI, as a conclusion, proposes that defects which deprived minority shareholders of appraisal rights should make resolution at shareholders' meeting void to protect minority shareholders.

    영어초록

    When there are certain fundamental corporate changes, appraisal rights provide dissenting shareholders the option to sell their shares back to the corporation for fair value. Examples of fundamental corporate changes are following; mergers, acquisition, divisions-mergers, consolidations, serious charter amendments, sales of substantially all the corporation's assets and so on. The purpose of appraisal rights is to protect minority shareholders who do not want fundamental changes nor be forced to invest in new corporations against their free will.
    If proposed corporate action for fundamental corporate changes requiring appraisal rights becomes effective, the corporation must give a notice to all shareholders who are entitled to assert appraisal rights before shareholders' meeting. However, in the Supreme Court's case(대법원 2010. 7. 22. 선고 2008다37193 판결), minority shareholders who held about 9% of the total corporation's shares were deprived of their appraisal rights because the corporation missed to give them a notice about fundamental corporate changes requiring appraisal rights before shareholders' meeting. Superior court of New Jersey in Applestein v. United Board & Carton Corp., held that majority shareholders, no matter however overwhelming it may turn out to be, may not deprive appraisal rights of minority shareholders, no matter how few they may be in number. Like this decision, the dissenting shareholders have right to object to corporation's plan and obtain appraisal right of their respective shares. To do so, the corporation should have given minority shareholders (no matter how few they may be in number) a notice about fundamental corporate changes requiring appraisal rights before shareholders' meeting.
    This article focuses on discussing whether defects which deprived minority shareholders of appraisal rights make resolution at shareholders' meeting void or voidable. Part II reviews detail facts of the Supreme Court's case to clarify the issues of this article. This part also overviews history and role of dissenter's appraisal rights and finds out that shareholders in division-merger cases are able to have statutory appraisal rights like shareholders in merger cases. Part III addresses whether defects which deprived minority shareholders of appraisal rights make resolution at shareholders' meeting void or voidable under the Supreme Court's case laws. Part IV discusses whether defects which deprived minority shareholders of appraisal rights make resolution at shareholders' meeting void or voidable under the U.S. case laws. Part V compares the Supreme Court's case with another Supreme Court's case(대법원 1993. 10. 12. 선고 92다28235, 28242 판결) which is factually similar to the former. Lastly, part VI, as a conclusion, proposes that defects which deprived minority shareholders of appraisal rights should make resolution at shareholders' meeting void to protect minority shareholders.

    참고자료

    · 없음
  • 자주묻는질문의 답변을 확인해 주세요

    해피캠퍼스 FAQ 더보기

    꼭 알아주세요

    • 자료의 정보 및 내용의 진실성에 대하여 해피캠퍼스는 보증하지 않으며, 해당 정보 및 게시물 저작권과 기타 법적 책임은 자료 등록자에게 있습니다.
      자료 및 게시물 내용의 불법적 이용, 무단 전재∙배포는 금지되어 있습니다.
      저작권침해, 명예훼손 등 분쟁 요소 발견 시 고객센터의 저작권침해 신고센터를 이용해 주시기 바랍니다.
    • 해피캠퍼스는 구매자와 판매자 모두가 만족하는 서비스가 되도록 노력하고 있으며, 아래의 4가지 자료환불 조건을 꼭 확인해주시기 바랍니다.
      파일오류 중복자료 저작권 없음 설명과 실제 내용 불일치
      파일의 다운로드가 제대로 되지 않거나 파일형식에 맞는 프로그램으로 정상 작동하지 않는 경우 다른 자료와 70% 이상 내용이 일치하는 경우 (중복임을 확인할 수 있는 근거 필요함) 인터넷의 다른 사이트, 연구기관, 학교, 서적 등의 자료를 도용한 경우 자료의 설명과 실제 자료의 내용이 일치하지 않는 경우
문서 초안을 생성해주는 EasyAI
안녕하세요. 해피캠퍼스의 방대한 자료 중에서 선별하여 당신만의 초안을 만들어주는 EasyAI 입니다.
저는 아래와 같이 작업을 도와드립니다.
- 주제만 입력하면 목차부터 본문내용까지 자동 생성해 드립니다.
- 장문의 콘텐츠를 쉽고 빠르게 작성해 드립니다.
- 스토어에서 무료 캐시를 계정별로 1회 발급 받을 수 있습니다. 지금 바로 체험해 보세요!
이런 주제들을 입력해 보세요.
- 유아에게 적합한 문학작품의 기준과 특성
- 한국인의 가치관 중에서 정신적 가치관을 이루는 것들을 문화적 문법으로 정리하고, 현대한국사회에서 일어나는 사건과 사고를 비교하여 자신의 의견으로 기술하세요
- 작별인사 독후감
해캠 AI 챗봇과 대화하기
챗봇으로 간편하게 상담해보세요.
2025년 08월 04일 월요일
AI 챗봇
안녕하세요. 해피캠퍼스 AI 챗봇입니다. 무엇이 궁금하신가요?
8:32 오후