2008년 회사법 분야의 중요 대법원 판례는 다음과 같다. 법인격부인론의 역적용은 회사의 허구적인 존재가 부인되어야 정의가 실현되는 특별한 경우에 인정된다. 기존회사가 채무를 면탈하기 위하여 기업의 형태·내용이 실질적으로 동일한 신설회사를 설립하였다면, 신설회사의 설립은 기존회사의 채무면탈이라는 위법한 목적 달성을 위하여 회사제도를 남용한것에 해당한다. 이사는 감시의무위반에 대하여 회사에 대한 손해배상책임을 진다. 즉, 주식회사의 이사가 대표이사나 다른 업무담당이사의 업무집행이 위법하다고 의심할 만한 사유가 있음에도 이를 방치한 경우, 그로 인하여 제3자가 입은 손해에 대하여 배상책임을 진다. 경영판단원칙하에서는 법원은 이사의 독립한 경영판단에 대한 사법심사를 하지 않는다. 이사가 임무를 수행하면서 법령을 위반한 행위를 한 때에는 그 행위 자체가 회사에 대한 채무불이행에 해당하므로, 그로 인하여 회사에 손해가 발생한 이상 특별한 사정이 없는 한 손해배상책임을 면할 수 없고, 법령을 위반한 행위에 대하여는 원칙적으로 경영판단의 원칙이 적용되지 않는다.

Thefollowings are some meaningful Supreme Court decisions for the corporate law cases delivered in 2008. Doctrine of the disregard of the corporate entity : (1) Reverse piercing is appropriate in those limited instances requiring that the corporation fiction be ignored so that justice may be promoted, and (2) While the classic theory of the disregard of the corporate entity involves a creditor reaching the personal assets of a controlling individual to satisfy a corporation’s debt, the “reverse” piercing situation involves a creditor reaching the assets of a corporation to satisfy the debt of a corporate insider based on a showing that the corporate entity is really the alter ego of the individual. Director’s duty to monitor : (1) Directors are liable to corporation for breach of duty to exercise appropriate monitering, and (2) When director in fact exercises good faith effort to perform duty of monitor, he or she should be deemed to satisfy fully duty of attention to corporation’s affairs. Business judgment rule : (1) Under business judgment rule, courts eschew intervention in corporate decision-making if judgment of directors and officers is uninfluenced by personal consideration and is exercised in good faith, and (2) Illegal acts may amount to a breach of fiduciary duty and for reasons of public policy, directors who did illegal acts could not protected under business judgment rule. But the fact that it resulted from a violation of criminal law alone does not create a breach of fiduciary duty by directors.

Thefollowings are some meaningful Supreme Court decisions for the corporate law cases delivered in 2008. Doctrine of the disregard of the corporate entity : (1) Reverse piercing is appropriate in those limited instances requiring that the corporation fiction be ignored so that justice may be promoted, and (2) While the classic theory of the disregard of the corporate entity involves a creditor reaching the personal assets of a controlling individual to satisfy a corporation’s debt, the “reverse” piercing situation involves a creditor reaching the assets of a corporation to satisfy the debt of a corporate insider based on a showing that the corporate entity is really the alter ego of the individual. Director’s duty to monitor : (1) Directors are liable to corporation for breach of duty to exercise appropriate monitering, and (2) When director in fact exercises good faith effort to perform duty of monitor, he or she should be deemed to satisfy fully duty of attention to corporation’s affairs. Business judgment rule : (1) Under business judgment rule, courts eschew intervention in corporate decision-making if judgment of directors and officers is uninfluenced by personal consideration and is exercised in good faith, and (2) Illegal acts may amount to a breach of fiduciary duty and for reasons of public policy, directors who did illegal acts could not protected under business judgment rule. But the fact that it resulted from a violation of criminal law alone does not create a breach of fiduciary duty by directors.

doctrine of the disregard of the corporate entity, reverse piercing, director's duty to monitor, business judgment rule