주식회사의 감사위원회제도에 관한 연구

Abstract

일본 상법의 영향을 받아 우리 商法은 理事會와 對等 · 獨立的인 關係를 유지하는 監督査關인 監事를 두고 있었다. 그러나 현실적으로는 경영진을 견제하여야 할 監事가 經營陣에 의해 選任되고 그 影響力 아래에 놓여 있었기 때문에, 경영진을 제대로 牽制하지 못하여 企業經營의 不透明性과 非效率性에 대한 批判이 지속적으로 제기되고 있었다. 이러한 상황에서 1997년에는 外換危機로 인하여 우리나라가 救濟金融을 받게 되었고, 經營監督이라는 본래의 기능을 제대로 수행하지 못하는 監事制度가 金融危機를 招來한 原因 중 하나로 지목되었다. IMF와 외국기관투자자 등은 企業支配構造의 改善을 요구하였고, 국내적으로도 종전의 監事制度만으로는 監督技能에 限界가 있다는 共感帶가 형성되었다. 이에 따라 정부는 外部人士의 迎入을 통해 監査機關의 獨立性을 確保하고, 經營監督技能의 實效性을 提高하고자 하는 방안을 모색하게 되었다. 그 결과 1999년에 商法을 改正하여 監事에 갈음하여 監査委員會를 설치할 수 있도록 하였으며, 2000년에는 證券去來法을 改正하여 자산총액 2조원 이상의 上場法人에게는 監査委員會의 設置를 强制하였다. 새로이 도입된 감사위원회제도는 企業經營의 透明性 提高 및 效率性 確保라는 측면에서 肯定的인 效果를 가져온 것으로 평가되고 있다. 하지만 한편으로는 美國式의 監査委員會制度를 수용함에 있어서 충분한 검토가 이루어지지 못하고 法的 形式에 치중하여 제도를 도입한 결과, 監査委員會의 委員이 피감사기관인 理事會에 의해 選 · 解任되고, 하부기관인 감사위원회가 상부기관인 理事會의 業務執行에 대하여 監査해야 하는 등 여러 가지 問題點을 초래하게 되었다. 이에 따라 監査委員會制度는 도입 당시부터 현재까지 많은 학자들로부터 獨立性과 監督機能의 實效性에 커다란 문제가 있다는 批判을 받고 있다. 이러한 문제점을 개선하기 위해서는 監査委員會 委員의 選 · 解任 關聯制度를 개선하고, 감사위원회 및 위원의 權限을 强化하는 한편 監督機能의 活性化를 도모하여야 할 것이다. 구체적인 방법을 살펴보면 첫째로, 監査委員會 委員의 選 · 解任과 관련하여서는 위원의 選 · 解任權을 株主總會에 부여하고, 선 · 해임시의 議決權 制限制度를 개선하여야 할 것이다. 그리고 감사위원회 위원 全院을 社外理事로 構成하고, 결원 발생시에는 遲滯없이 또는 一定期間 이내에 缺員을 補充토록 하여야 할 것이다. 둘째로, 監査委員會 및 委員의 權限强化를 위해서는 감사위원회의 결정에 대한 理事會의 再決議權을 排除하고, 집행임원제도를 도입하여 이사회로부터 業務執行機能을 分離하여야 할 것이다. 또한 감사위원회 위원을 獨任制化 하고, 監事의 任期 규정을 準用토록 함으로써 감사지위의 안정성을 확보하여야 할 것이다. 셋째로, 監査委員會의 機能 活性化와 관련해서는 감사위원회의 常時的 業務補助機關을 設置토록 하고, 위원에 대한 동기부여를 위해 報酬의 現實化가 필요하다. 그리고 감사위원회의 활동을 실질적으로 지원할 수 있도록 會社의 內規를 整備하고, 감사위원회 위원의 具體的인 活動內容을 公示토록 함으로써 적극적인 감사위원회 활동을 유도할 필요가 있다. 이러한 사항 이외에도 감사위원회의 義務的 設置對象을 擴大하고, 사외이사의 선임시 集中投票制를 義務化 할 필요가 있다고 생각된다. 이상에서 언급한 바와 같은 제도개선이 이루어져 監査委員會의 獨立性이 確保되고 監督機能도 正常化되고 난 이후에는, 中長期的으로 우리나라의 監査制度에 대한 全面的인 再檢討가 이루어져야 할 것이다. 즉, 監事와 監査委員會가 竝存하는 현행의 제도적 틀을 그대로 維持해 나갈 것인지 아니면 監事制度를 廢止하고 監査委員會만을 두도록 함으로써 英美式의 制度로 개선해 나갈 것인지에 대한 深度있는 硏究가 진행되어 우리나라의 현실에 맞는 最適의 監査制度를 다시금 모색하여야 할 것이다.; With influence of audit system in Japan, there has been the auditor as the audit agency which is in independent and equivalent relations with the board of directors in Korea since the early years of enactment of commercial law. However, since the auditor was appointed and influenced by the management in actuality, it couldn’t properly check the management. So there have been continuous criticisms of the transparency and efficiency in corporate management. Under the circumstances like this, Korea had to seek to receive the relief loan due to foreign exchange crisis in 1997; the audit system which couldn’t fully carry out its original purpose was pointed out as one of the reasons caused the financial crisis. The IMF and foreign institutional investors demanded for improvement of the corporate governance to enhance the transparency of corporate management. Also, the consensus was created within Korea that existing audit system alone wasn’t for supervision. Thereupon, the government recruited the outside directors as the part of seeking measure to ensure the independence of the audit agency and to enhance the effectiveness of supervisory function on management. As a result, in 1999, the commercial law was revised to organize the audit committee as a subordinate committee to the board of directors. And in 2000, the Security and Exchange Act was reformed to enforce the listed corporation with total asset of more than 2 trillion to set up the audit committee. With these measures, the audit committee started to operate as the new regulations system, different from the existing auditor system. The newly introduced audit committee system is judged that it has had positive effect on enhancing the transparency and securing the efficiency in the respect of corporation management. But on the other hand, since the audit committee system of U.S kind was adopted without thorough investigation, it caused many problems which includes that the member of audit committee as the committee system is appointed by the board of directors which the subjected to be audited, and the audit committee which is a subordinated to the board of directors is to audit the superior authority for its management of business. So, many scholars have been criticized from the beginning that the audit committee system has many issues regarding the independence of the audit committee and effectiveness of its supervisory function. To improve these problems, it is necessary to reform the system related to appointment and dismissal, and also to strengthen authorities of the audit committee and its members, in addition to seek the plan for revitalization of supervisory function. As for the concrete examples, firstly, in respect of organizing the audit committee, the general meeting of stockholders should be granted the right of appointment and dismissal, and restrictions on the voting rights need to be improved in case of appointment and dismissal. And the audit committee should be organized only with outside directors, and when a position is vacated, the vacancy needs to be filled without any delay or in certain period of time. Secondly, to strengthen authorities of the audit committee and its member, the board of director’s right to cast vote on the decision made by the audit committee needs to be excluded and the function of business management should be separated from the board of directors by setting up the executive officer system. And the member of the audit committee alone should be responsible for auditing and the service term of the member should be applied correspondingly to the term of the auditor, so that the audit should be conducted independently while reducing influence of the management or the largest shareholder. Finally, the regular operation assisting agency for the audit committee should be organized in regard of revitalization of performance and enhancing efficiency of the audit committee, and actualization of the service fee is required to provide motivation for the members of committee. Also, it is necessary to reorganize the internal regulations of the corporation in order to support the activities of the audit committee practically, as well as to induce positive activities of the audit committee by announcing its activity details publicly. And other than things mentioned above, it is considered to be necessary to expand the range of corporations required to set up the audit committee and to make the cumulative voting system mandatory for electing the outside director for enhancing the supervisory function of the audit committee and ensuring the independence side by side. After the independence of the audit committee is ensured and the supervisory function is normalized as stated above, the audit system in Korea should be reexamined with full scale in mid-and long- term. In other words, the audit system which is the most suitable to reality in Korea should be investigated. To accomplish this, the intensive studies should be conducted on whether to maintain the existing system in which auditor and audit committee coexist or to adopt the system from U.S and England through the adjustment of abolishing the auditor and maintaining only the audit committee.