IMF 이후 경제사정의 악화로 많은 기업이 도산하였는데, 경영악화로 인한 부실기업의 처리 문제는 지금도 국가 경제적으로 중요한 과제로 다루어지고 있다. 기업구조조정 차원에서 이루어지는 다양한 방법 가운데, 채무의 주식화는 기업정상화의 중요한 수단으로 볼 수 있다. 채무의 주식화는 부실기업에 대하여 채권을 갖고 있는 금융기관 등이 자신의 대출채권을 채무자 회사의 주식으로 전환하는 것으로, 상법상 제334조 주금납입에 대한 상계금지 규정에도 불구하고 일종의 현물출자로 보아야 할 것이다.채무의 주식화와 관련하여 특히 쟁점이 되는 것은 채권을 어떻게 평가할 것인가 하는 점이다. 생각건대 채무자의 대차대조표상 채무가 자본으로 전환되는 것일 뿐이므로 회계상 채무는 권면액으로 계상되어야 하고, 채권자가 금전채권을 현물출자하게 되면 그 채권액에 해당하는 채무의 면제와 함께 액면상당액의 순자산이 증가하기 때문에 권면액설이 타당하다고 보아야 할 것이다. 채무의 주식화에 있어서도 이사 등의 책임 문제는 여전히 존재하게 되는데, 경영판단의 원칙을 인정한다 하더라도 해당 회사의 이사가 재량권의 범위를 넘거나, 중대한 과실로 채무의 주식화에 대한 판단을 한 경우 등에는 손해배상책임을 부담한다고 하여야 할 것이다.

Many companies went bankrupt due to the aggravation in economy, since the financial crisis of Korea. It is still a significant issue in Korea how to deal with insolvent enterprises caused by the aggravation in their management. Debt-equity swap in corporate restructuring is an important instrument used for the normalization of enterprises. This study examines the legal issues in regard with debt-equity swap that financial institutions often adopt in order to collect their loans to insolvent enterprises. Debt-equity swap means that financial institutions, which have loans to insolvent enterprise, convert their debts to equity of insolvent enterprises. Despite of setoff prohibition with capital contribution according to Article 334 of Commercial Act, it can be considered as in-kind contribution. A point at issue regarding debt-equity swap is how to appraise debts. It seems that debts are converted into equity in balance sheet, so debts are not appropriated with appraised-value, but face value. In case debtors contribute in kind, obligations equivalent to debts are exempted and net asset is increased at face value, so it is reasonable to say that face-value approach is right. Responsibility issue of directors still exist in case of debt-equity swap and directors are liable to compensate for damages if they misuse their discretionary power to act or decide debt-equity swap due to significant mistakes, although the principle on management decision is acknowledged.

Many companies went bankrupt due to the aggravation in economy, since the financial crisis of Korea. It is still a significant issue in Korea how to deal with insolvent enterprises caused by the aggravation in their management. Debt-equity swap in corporate restructuring is an important instrument used for the normalization of enterprises. This study examines the legal issues in regard with debt-equity swap that financial institutions often adopt in order to collect their loans to insolvent enterprises. Debt-equity swap means that financial institutions, which have loans to insolvent enterprise, convert their debts to equity of insolvent enterprises. Despite of setoff prohibition with capital contribution according to Article 334 of Commercial Act, it can be considered as in-kind contribution. A point at issue regarding debt-equity swap is how to appraise debts. It seems that debts are converted into equity in balance sheet, so debts are not appropriated with appraised-value, but face value. In case debtors contribute in kind, obligations equivalent to debts are exempted and net asset is increased at face value, so it is reasonable to say that face-value approach is right. Responsibility issue of directors still exist in case of debt-equity swap and directors are liable to compensate for damages if they misuse their discretionary power to act or decide debt-equity swap due to significant mistakes, although the principle on management decision is acknowledged.

business judgement rule, face-value, corporate restructuring, doctrine of capital adequacy, debt-equity swap, appraised-value.