본문 바로가기
HOME> 논문 > 논문 검색상세

논문 상세정보

증권법연구 , 2014년, pp.185 - 223   http://dx.doi.org/10.17785/kjsl.2014.15.2.185
본 등재정보는 저널의 등재정보를 참고하여 보여주는 베타서비스로 정확한 논문의 등재여부는 등재기관에 확인하시기 바랍니다.

베일인 제도의 한국내 도입을 위한 법적 고려사항
Legal Considrations in Implementing a Bail-in System in Korea

고영미 
  • 초록

    During and after the global crisis of 2007-2009, nations around the world are making efforts to reform their resolution regime primarily with an intention to introduce and develop provisions to protect the public from paying for bailouts of failing banks before investors fully or partly absorb bank losses. For this objective, this article researched new Basel III requirements of loss absorbency provisions within resolution process for the financial institutions at the point of non-viability that Basel Committee on Banking Supervision issued and proposed recently. The FSB also included statutory bail-in powers as a resolution tool in its recommendations of statutory framework for resolution, the “Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes”. Such “Bail-in within resolution” is an additional resolution option that could be used in association with other resolution tools, satisfying the Key Attributes for a robust resolution regime. I introduced basic concepts and structure of bail-in regime and analyzed several legal issues that may impact on the adoption of bail-in measures. The issues of this artice are limited to analyzing the legal predicates for, and obstacles associated with, implementing bail-in measures in each of the jurisdictions analyzed. One notable attribute of Bail-in regime is that it can treat each creditor group in same class in different ways. As a result, the resolution of conflicts between the “Equal Treatment of Creditors” and this Exemption under Bail-in regime should be studied. In turn, with respect to such cases, one more premise is required: where regulators impose the bail-in regime on the stakeholders including general investors (creditors) and depositors, it is necessary to be ensured that each claimants should receive the payment which is equal to or more than the amount they would have received in the liquidating process under the Bankruptcy Code. In this regards, I recommend the provision of minimum payment requirement, such as Section 210(a)(7)(B) under Dodd-Frank Act that stipulates such minimum payment requirement with respect to the Title II Orderly Liquidation Authority, in the context of payment under Bail-in regime.


 활용도 분석

  • 상세보기

    amChart 영역
  • 원문보기

    amChart 영역

원문보기

무료다운로드
유료다운로드
  • 원문이 없습니다.

유료 다운로드의 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 신규 회원가입, 로그인, 유료 구매 등이 필요할 수 있습니다. 해당 사이트에서 발생하는 귀하의 모든 정보활동은 NDSL의 서비스 정책과 무관합니다.

원문복사신청을 하시면, 일부 해외 인쇄학술지의 경우 외국학술지지원센터(FRIC)에서
무료 원문복사 서비스를 제공합니다.