Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T05:09:03.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impending Amendments to Korean Corporate Laws in 2009: A Mystic Mix

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2015

Young-Cheol K. Jeong
Young-Cheol K. Jeong*
Affiliation:
Yonsei Law School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The corporate law reform initiatives proposed by the Korean government in 2008 are still pending before the National Assembly. While the Korean government was sympathetic to the arguments by business interests for liberal rules conducive to business organization, these demands have to be weighed against the desire for good corporate governance norms that promote accountability and transparency. Such a tension has unfortunately resulted in internal contradictions and uncertainties in the context of Korea. This article points out the uncertainties that the reform initiatives have left unresolved and the potential for their resolution by the judiciary. More fundamentally, the author argues that, in order to resolve the issues currently left unanswered, there is a need to address the debates regarding the theoretical foundations of the corporation.

Keywords

amendment of Korean corporate lawjudicial activism in Korea
Type
Research Article
Information
Asian Journal of Comparative Law , Volume 4 , 2009 , pp. 1 - 34
Copyright
Copyright © Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The first two digits indicates that the Bill is one considered by the 18th National Assembly.

2 Bill No. 1803424 is available online: <http://www.assembly.go.kr/renew07/info/inf/tra_read.j>.

3 Bill No. 1801556 is available online: <http://likms.assembly.go.kr/bill/jsp/BillDetail.jsp?bill_id=ARC_J0E8G1I0T2J1U1B8C1X0N1F3H7R9G4>.

4 Chushikhoesa is translated as joint stock company, which is similar to a general corporation under US corporate laws.

5 The Capital Market Law is available online: <http://www.law.go.kr/LSW>.

6 Law No. 9407 amending the Capital Market Law with effect from 4 Feb. 2009, Ch. 3-2, Arts. 165-2 to 165-18. The Articles. refer to articles in the Capital Market Law and Presidential Decree No. 21291 amending Enforcement Decree under the Capital Market Law (“Capital Market Law-ED”) with effect from 4 Feb. 2009, Arts. 176-2 to 176-18. (The Arts. refer to articles in the Capital Market Law-ED).

7 See Staff Report and Minutes of the Judiciary Comm. Meeting on 12 Jan. 12 2009, supra note 2.

8 Law No. 3724, dated 10 Apr. 1984. See full text and the reason for amendment, supra note 3.

9 See ibid. Law No. 5053, dated 29 Dec. 1995. See full text and the reason for amendment.

10 See ibid. Law No. 5591, dated 28 Dec. 1998; Law No. 6086, dated 31 Dec. 1999; Law No. 6488 dated, 24 Jul. 2001; Law No. 6545, dated 29 Dec. 2001.

11 Bill No. 177463 submitted by the Government on 20 Sep. 2007. See Staff Report and Minutes of the Judiciary Comm. Meeting on 21 Nov. 2007, supra note 2.

12 See text, Section V(A)(1) et seq.

13 CC, Arts. 703-724, et seq.

14 KCC, Arts. 78-86.

15 KCC, Arts. 178-267. Hapmyong hoesa is translated as general member corporation.

16 KCC, Arts. 268-287.Hapja hoesa is translated as limited member corporation.

17 KCC, Arts. 288-542. See also supra note 4.

18 KCC Arts. 543-613. Youhan hoesa is translated as limited corporation.

19 KCC, Arts. 195 and 269.

20 CC, Arts. 712, 713 and KCC, Art. 82.

21 KCC, Arts. 212 and 269.

22 KCC, Art. 279.

23 Bill 1801566, Arts. 86-2 to 86-10. Hapja chohap is translated as limited partnership contract.

24 Bill, Arts. 287-2 to 287-45. Yuhan chaekim hoesa is translated as limited liability company.

25 Bill, Arts. 86-5 and 287-12.

26 As for tax, see Special Tax Treatment Limits Law, Cl. 10-3, Arts. 100-14 to 100-26 on Special Tax Treatment for Joint Ventures (translated from dongup kiup).

27 Minor exceptions such as Art. 383, Para. 1.

28 <http://dart.fss.or.kr> Samsung Electronics/Annual Report/2008.3.31.

29 KCC, Arts. 542-2 to 542-12. As to the special rules for listed companies under the Capital Market Law, see supra note 6.

30 OAL, Art. 2; Enforcement Decree under the OAL (“OAL-ED”), Art. 2.

31 Bill, Arts. 292, 318, 363, 383 and 409.

32 Bill, Art. 545.

33 Bill, Art. 556.

34 Bill, Art. 571.

35 KCC, Art. 382. US corporate laws differ on the meaning of the majority: simple majority or absolute majority and whether a super-majority voting requirement can be included in the articles. See MBCA ss. 7.25 and 7.26, pre-1999 MBCA ss. 11.03 and 12.02 and DGCL ss. 216 and 242.

36 KCC, Art. 393.

37 KCC, Arts. 374 (business transfer), 522 (merger), 343-2 (capital reduction) and 434(amendment of articles).

38 KCC, Art. 374-2. Shareholders of a merged company cannot be bought out.

39 KCC, Arts. 526 and 527. In the case of short form mergers and small mergers, board approval is sufficient. KCC, Arts. 527-2 and 527-3. Prior to the amendment of Art. 343-2 of the KCC, there were discussions about the possibility of stock redemption by amendment of the articles. Most of the comments were negative.

40 Bill, Art. 523, Item 4. It is not clear from the Bill whether the dissenting shareholders of the merging company can be bought out.

41 KCC, Arts. 522-3 and 527-3, Para. 5.

42 Bill, Arts. 360-24 to 360-26.

43 Put option as opposed to appraisal rights may be a better name.

44 KCC, Art. 399.

45 KCC, Art. 400.

46 Bill, Art. 400.

47 Bill, Art. 399, Para. 1 clearly states that breach of fiduciary duty is not based on moral precept, but on traditional liability for willful or negligent misconduct. Whether this change is desirable, the writer is not sure.

48 KCC, Art. 382-3.

49 KCC, Arts. 393-2 and 415-2.

50 KCC, Art. 403.

51 KCC, Art. 398.

52 Bill, Art. 398, Para. 1.

53 Bill, Art. 398, Para. 3.

54 KCC, Art. 401-2.

55 Bill, Arts. 408-2 to 408-9.

56 Bill, Art. 368-4.

57 KCC, Art. 329.

58 KCC, Art. 289, Para. 1, Item 4.

59 KCC, Art. 451.

60 Bill, Arts. 291 and 329.

61 Bill, Art. 451.

62 KCC, Book III Company, Chapter 4 Joint Stock Company, Sub-Chapter 7 Accounting, Arts. 347 to 468.

63 OAL, Art. 13; OAL-ED, Art. 7-2. The Korea Accounting Standards Board has established extensive legal authorities such as Preface to Statements of Korea Accounting Standard, Korea Financial Accounting Standards, Supplementary Standards, Concepts, Interpretations and Korea Accounting Institute Opinions. See online: <http://www.kasb.or.kr>.

64 Bill, Art. 446-2.

65 Bill, Art. 447.

66 Bill, Art. 449-2.

67 KCC, Art. 458.

68 KCC, Art. 459.

69 KCC, Arts. 460 and 461.

70 Bill, Art.459.

71 Bill, Art. 461-2.

72 KCC, Art. 449.

73 KCC, Arts. 462 and 462-2.

74 KCC, Arts. 361 and 393.

75 Bill, Art. 462, Para. 2.

76 Bill, Art. 462-4.

77 Bill, Art. 462, Para. 1, Item 4.

78 KCC, Art. 344.

79 KCC, Art. 335.

80 STL, Arts. 189 through 193, especially Art. 191-2.

81 Bill, Arts. 344-2 to 344-4, 345 and 346.

82 Bill, Art. 344-3.

83 KCC, Arts. 469 to 516-10.

84 STL, Arts. 191-4 and 191-5.

85 KCC, Arts. 470 to 473.

86 Bill, Art. 469.

87 Bill, Arts. 480-2, 480-3, 481, 482, 483, 484, 484-2 and 485.

88 Bill, Art. 478, Para. 3.

89 Bill, Art. 356-2.

90 See Preface and Comm. Activity Report Chapter, Korea Commercial Law Association's Study Report on Amendment of the KCC (“Study Report”), I–XI (Aug. 2005). The three-member committee had convened ten times for the finalization of the report since its organization in the summer of 2004. See also individual opinions in Chapter II of the Study Report, Chan-Hyung Chung, Opinion for Amendment of Corporate Governance Rules, 49-85; Kyung-Young Chung, Opinion for Amendment of Corporate IT Rules, 86-144; and Hyung-Kyu Lee, Opinion for Amendment of Corporate Law in General, 145-180.

91 KMOJ, Press release with attachment, “Consider Abolishing Min. Capital, Introducing Internet Shareholders Meeting” (27 Jul. 2005), online:<http://www.moj.go.kr>>Google Scholar.

92 KMOJ, Public Notice with attachments, “Public Hearing on Company Law Chapter” (20 Jun. 2006) online: <http://www.moj.go.kr>>Google Scholar, Chan-Hyung Chung made a presentation on behalf of Group 1, while Kun Shik Kim on behalf of Group 2. Presentation materials were attached to the above KMOJ Public Notice.

93 KMOJ, Advance Notice of New Legislation on Company Law Chapter Amendment with attachments (4 Oct. 2006), online: <http://www.moj.go.kr>. The Advance Notice has four attachments: Press Release, Public Notice, Bill, and Comparison Matrix.

94 Study Report, supra note 90, at 147–150.

95 Hong, Bok-Ki, “Draft Amendment on Corporate Governance” 94 The Korean Legal Center 5–30 (Oct. 2006)Google Scholar; Song, Jong-June, “Draft Amendment on Corporate Finance” 94 The Korean Legal Center 31–59 (Oct. 2006)Google Scholar; Yang, Seung-Kyu, Koh, Chang Hyun & Lee, Tae-Jong, “Comments and Discussions” 94 The Korean Legal Center 60–83 (Oct. 2006)Google Scholar.

96 Hong, Sung-Kyu, “KMOJ Decided to Review Corporate Opportunity Clause” The Law Times (11 Jan. 2007), online: <http://www.lawtimes.co.kr>.)Google Scholar

97 Kim, Dong-Wook, “Final Proposal Likely to Induce Abusive Litigation” The Han Kyung (5 Feb. 2007), online: <http://www.hankyung.com>Google Scholar.

98 KMOJ, Advance Notice of New Legislation on Company Law Chapter Amendment with attachments (28 Aug. 2007), online:<http://www.moj.go.kr>. The Advance Notice has two attachments: Public Notice and Bill.

99 KMOJ, Public Notice on Company Law Chapter Amendment (27 Aug. 2007), online: <http://www.moj.go.kr>. The Public Notice has two attachments: Press Release and Public Hearing Materials dated 5 Sep. 2007. Jae-Yeon Lim made a presentation while five panelists made comments.

100 KMOJ, Public Notice on Amendment Proposal (12 Sep. 2007), online: <http://www.moj.go.kr> with attachment.

101 KMOJ, Advance Notice of New Legislation on Company Law Chapter Amendment (6 May 2008 ), online:<http://www.moj.go.kr>, with public notice and the bill attached.

102 KCC, Art. 171, Para. 1.

103 Berle, , “Corporate Powers as Powers in Trust” (1931) 44 Harv. L. Rev. 1049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

104 Dodd, , “For Whom Are Corporate Managers Trustees?” (1932) 45 Harv. L. Rev. 1145 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Allen, William T., “Our Schizophrenic Conception of the Business Corporation” (1992) 14 Cardozo L. Rev. 261 Google Scholar.

105 Sun-Ho Shin v. Public Prosecutor, 80 DO 537, dated 13 Apr. 1982; Korea Supreme Court Decision 83 DO 2330, dated 23 Dec. 1983. See also 89 DO 570, dated 23 May 1989; 2005 DO 49)15, dated 28 Oct. 2005.

106 Korea First Bank v. Lee, et al., 2002 NA 9086, dated 15 Mar. 2002.

107 KCC v. Hyundae Elevator, 2003 KAHAP 369, dated 12 Dec. 2003 re injunctive order preventing issuance of new shares. Compare this line of cases with Unocal Corp. v. Mesa Petroleum Co., 493 A.2d 946, 955 (Del. 1985).

108 Lee, Jae Woo, “A Contractual Approach to Corporate Governance and Its Implications for Korean Enterprises: A Coasian Perspective” 10 Industrial Organization Review IV, 111 (Korean Academic Society of Industrial Organization, 2002)Google Scholar; Sin, Seuk-Hun, “Foundations of Law and Economics Approach to Corporate Law” (2007) 16 Yonsei Law Review 169 Google Scholar.

109 KCC, Art. 335, Para. 1.

110 KCC, Art. 418, Para. 2.

111 KCC, Art. 462-3, Para. 1.

112 KCC, Art. 513, Para. 2.

113 KCC, Art. 516-2, Para. 2.

114 KCC, Arts. 513, Para. 3 and 516-2, Para. 4.

115 KCC, Art. 343, Para. 1.

116 KCC, Art. 345, Para. 2.

117 KCC, Art. 346, Para. 1. There are many provisions in the KCC that authorize the shareholders to design the details in the articles, such as reasons for dissolution, designation of liquidator, designation of transfer agent, grant of stock option, different kinds of shares, minimum dividend ratio for preferred shares, record date or shareholder register closing period, issuance of bearer form share certificate, authority of shareholders’ meeting, venue of shareholders’ meeting, chair at shareholders’ meeting, quorum for regular shareholders’ meeting, exercise of voting rights in writing, non-voting right of preferred shares, exclusion of cumulative voting, fiduciary duty, extension of director's term, number of directors, share retention requirement of directors, director's compensation, selection of representative director, shortening of prior notice period for board meeting, super-majority requirement for board resolution, exclusion of no face-to-face meeting resolution, establishment of committees within the board, board authority that cannot be delegated to committees, lower share ownership ratio for excluding voting rights in selecting statutory director, establishment of audit committee, terms of new shares, shareholders’ resolution for a transfer of reserves to capital accounts, and so forth.

118 Bill, Art. 329, Para. 1.

119 Bill, Art. 449-2, Para. 1.

120 Bill, Arts. 341, Para. 2 and 462, Para. 2.

121 Bill, Art. 344, Para. 2.

122 Bill, Art.356-2, Para 1.

123 Bill, Art. 400, Para. 2.

124 Bill, Art. 408-2.

125 Bill, Art. 462-4, Para. 1. As to delegation of bond issuance authority from the board to the representative director for one year, see Bill, Art. 469, Para. 4.

126 Mitchell, Lawrence E., Cunningham, Lawrence A. & Haas, Jeffrey J., Corporate Finance and Governance, 3d ed. (USA, Caroline Academic Press, 2006) at 8 Google Scholar.

127 KCC, Art. 391, Para. 1.

128 KCC, Art. 368, Para. 1.

129 Inchon District Court, Boochon Branch Decision, 2007 KAHAP 335, dated 13 Apr. 2007, confirmed an amendment of the articles requiring 95% of the shares present and 90% of the shares outstanding for resolutions for terminating directors to be null and void as it violates the substance of a joint stock company and infringes shareholder's innate rights. Caledonian Trust Cayman Limited et al. v. In-Chang Whang et al., 2008 KAHAP 1167, Seoul Central District Court Decision, dated 2 June 2008, rendered the same view.

130 KCC,, Art. 335, Para. 1.

131 Enforcement Decree under the KCC (“KCC-ED”), Art. 2.

132 KCC, Art. 329, Para. 1. Bill, Art. 329 abolishes the minimum capital requirement with the introduction of no par shares.

133 KCC, Art. 383, Para. 1. Bill, Art. 383 increases the amount of paid-in capital from KRW500 million to KRW1 billion.

134 KCC, Art. 409, Para. 1.

135 KCC, Art. 415-2, Para. 1.

136 KCC, Art. 382, Para. 3.

137 KCC-ED, Art. 13, Para. 1 excludes certain companies, such as venture companies, corporate reorganization companies, etc.

138 KCC, Art. 542-8, Para. 1.

139 KCC-ED, Art. 13, Para. 2.

140 KCC, Art. 542-8, Para. 4.

141 KCC, Arts. 542-11 and 542-12.

142 KCC, Art. 542-10; KCC-ED, Art. 15, Para. 1.

143 Bill, Arts. 292, 318, 363 and 409.

144 As to the history of legal capital, see Manning, & Hanks, , Legal Capital, 3d ed. (USA, Foundation Press, 1990)Google Scholar.

145 Capital Market Law, Art. 390; KRX Listing Regulations most recently revised on 28 Jan. 2009, Art. 32, Para. 1, Item 2; KOSDAQ Listing Regulations most recently revised on 28 Jan. 2009, Art. 6, Para. 1, Item 2.

146 DEL. GEN. CORP. L. § 342.

147 Prof. Lawrence E. Mitchell even argues close corporations should be treated as partnerships instead of trying to develop varied rules. See Mitchell, Lawrence E., “Close Corporations Reconsidered” (1989) 63 Tulane L. Rev. 1143 Google Scholar.

148 KCC, Art. 169. Hyung-Gyu Lee, supra note 89, at 150 proposes revision of Art. 169 because a joint stock company and a limited company do not require two or more share/quota-holders or any other number of share/quota-holders.

149 Korean Supreme Court Decisions 92 DA 48727, dated 26 Feb. 1993; 2004 DA 25123, dated 10 Dec. 2004.

150 If the KCC articles from Subchapter 4 (Issuance of New Shares) to Subchapter 8 (bond) are about financial matters, the total number of articles exceeds 100.

151 Capital Market Law, Art. 1 [purpose of the law].

152 Law 9408, dated 3 Feb. 2009, revising the OAL.

153 Bill, Arts. 360-24 to 360-26.

154 For the pre- and post- 1983 position in Delaware, see Weinberger v. UOP, 457 A.2d 701 (Del. 1983).

155 Decision 2005 RA 37, dated 11 Aug. 2005.

156 Seoul W. D. Ct. Decision 2001 PA 41, dated 24 Mar. 2004, Seoul High Court Decision 2004 RA 282, dated 10 Apr. 2004.

157 2004 MA 1022 Decision, dated 24 Nov. 2006.

158 Seoul High Ct. Decision 2005RA192, dated 2 Apr. 2008.

159 Seoul High Ct. Decision 2006RA990, dated 6 Mar. 2008.

160 KMOJ, Public Notice, Public Hearing Materials on Corporate Governance Report dated 12 Oct. 2000 with attachment, online <http://www.moj.go.kr.>.

161 KCC, Art. 411.

162 KCC, Arts. 409-2, 410, 411, 412, 412-2, 412-3, 412-4, 413 and 413-2 are the outcome of such amendments.

163 Ha, Chang Hyo, “Legal Study of Enhancing the Role of Outside Directors” 26 Commercial Law Review (2007) 26 Commercial Law Review 45–84 Google Scholar; Won, Dong Wook, “How Should the Independence of Outside Director be Enhanced” (2007) 24 Anam L. Rev. 221–260 Google Scholar.

164 Bill, Arts. 408-9 and 382-3. Hwang, Keun Soo, “An Executive Officer System and Legal Problems in Korea” (2008) 49 Journal of Korean Law 133–163 Google Scholar.

165 Sung, Seung Je, “The Restrictions on Voting Rights of Financial Subsidiary” (2006) 25 [Korean] Com. L. Rev. 179 Google Scholar.

166 KCC, Art. 403, Para. 1.

167 KCC, Art. 542-6, Para. 6. Para. 7 provides for the possibility of lower percentage ownership requirement for minority shareholder rights in the articles of incorporation.

168 Compare old Presidential Decree No. 11485 with the current Presidential Decree No. 21288.

169 KCC-ED, Art. 4.

170 KCC-ED, Art. 5.

171 KCC-ED, Art. 6.

172 KCC-ED, Art. 9.

173 KCC-ED, Art. 10.

174 KCC-ED, Art. 11.

175 KCC-ED, Art. 12.

176 KCC-ED, Art. 13.

177 KCC-ED, Art. 14.

178 KCC-ED, Arts. 15 and 16.

179 Bill, Art. 447, Para. 1, Item 3.

180 Bill, Art. 299, Para. 2, Items 1, 2 and 3.

181 Bill, Art. 341, Para. 1, Item 2.

182 Bill, Art. 352-2, Para. 3.

183 Bill, Art. 368-4, Para. 3.

184 Bill, Art. 447, Para. 2.

185 Bill, Art. 459, Para. 1.

186 Capital Market Law, Ch. 302, Art. 165-2 to 165-18.

187 KCC, Art. 171.

188 KCC, Art. 331.

189 Decision 72 NA 2583, dated 8 May 1974.

190 CC, Art. 2, Para. 1.

191 Decision 74 DA 954, dated 13 Sept. 1977.

192 Decision 97 DA 21604, dated 19 Jan. 2001.

193 Decision 2002 DA 66892, dated 12 Nov. 2004.

194 Decision 2004 DA 26119, dated 25 Aug. 2006.

195 The Korea Supreme Court still takes a more conservative approach on piercing the corporate veil. In Decision 2007 DA 90982, dated 11 Sep. 2008, it also revoked the Daegoo High Court Decision on the ground that the corporate entity was not a mere formality in that case.

196 KCC, Arts. 403 and 542-6.

197 Decision 2002 NA 13746, dated 22 Aug. 2003.

197 Decision 2003 DA 49221, dated 23 Sep. 2004.

199 2006 Proposal, Art. 406-2. Chan-Hyung Chung, supra note 89, at 13. The 2006 Proposal also provides for parent company's right to inspect books and records of its subsidiaries.

200 e.g., Kim, Jae Bum, “Legislation of Double Derivative Suit--Whether it is in Accordance with Commercial Law” (2007) 25 [Korean] Com. L. Rev. 4 at 27–68 Google Scholar.

201 KCC, Art. 382, Para. 2.

202 KCC, Art. 382-3. The relationship between Art. 383-3 and Art. 382, Para. 2 is not clear. The writer believes Art. 383-3, in overruling the simple mandate rules, has opened a new horizon on fiduciary duty.

203 KCC, Arts. 397 and 398.

204 Decision 97 RA 36, dated 13 May 1997.

205 KCC, Art. 516 does not list Art. 429.

206 Law No. 6488 Amending the KCC with effect from 24 Jul. 2001.

207 June Kim v. SaveZone, Seoul High Court Decision 2006 NA 24218, dated 19 Jul. 2006; Kim X Bok v. HKMutual Savings Bank, et al., Seoul C. D.Ct. Decision, dated 13 May 2005; Chang et al. v. Money Today, Seoul C. D. Ct. Decision, 2007 KAHAP 3341, dated 19 Nov. 2007; MDHouse v. UBCare, Seoul S.D.Ct. Decision, 2003 KAHAP 16871, dated 25 Nov. 2004; Moohak v. Daeson, Busan High Ct. Decision, 2002 RA 96, dated 21 Jul. 2003; KCC v. Hyundai Elevator, Soowon D. Ct. Yeojoo Br. Decision, 2003 KAHAP 369, dated 12 Dec. 2003.

208 Decision 2006 KAHAP 393, dated 24 Mar. 2006.

209 2006 Proposal, Art. 342, Para. 2.

210 2007 Proposal, Art. 342, Para. 2 did not require that Art. 418 be applied by analogy to the disposal of treasury share. Hence, the board of a corporation can dispose of treasury shares without reasonable business reasons, subject to the fiduciary duty.

211 Bill, Art. 342.

212 Keumyoung v. FineDigital et al., Soowon D. Ct., Sungnam Br. Decision, 2007 KAHAP 30, dated 30 Jan. 2007; Kang XX et al. v. Donga Pharmaceutical, Seoul N.D.Ct. Decision, 2007 KAHAP 1082, dated 25 Oct. 2007; Tenia Tech v. Choi et al., Seoul C. D. Ct. Decision, 2007 KAHAP 1721, dated 20 Jun. 2007.

213 Compare 2006 Proposal, Art. 382-5 with 2007 Proposal.

214 Capital Market Law, Arts. 165-5, Para. 3; Capital Market Law-ED, Art. 176-7, Para. 2.

215 Decision 2004 BEHAP 151, dated 3 Nov. 2005.

216 STL, Art. 191, Para. 3; STL-ED, Art. 84-9, Para. 2.

217 KCC, Arts. 382, Para. 2 and 382-3.

218 KCC, Art. 398.

219 As to the potential risks involving the application of the fiduciary principle to close corporations, see Lawrence E. Mitchell, supra note 147, at 1677 “..from a broad prophylactic measure to a tool to remedy substantial misconduct.”

220 As to the risk of bureaucracy, see Deutsch, J.G., “The Teaching of Corporate Law: a Socratic Investigation of Law and Bureaucracy” (1987) 97 Yale L. J. 96 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

221 See Supra text accompanying note 101.

222 See Supra text accompanying note 166. It is also being discussed that all listed companies should have a licensed lawyer as compliance officers (23 Mar. 2008), seminar material: http://www.koreanbar.or.kr/publication/index_read.asp?page=1&t_id=newspaper&idx=5005.

223 Official License Letter to 25 Law Colleges from the Korean Ministry of Education, Science and Technology dated 2 September 2008.