earticle

영어

The artificial person as the main body of legal fiction has the ability of meaning and behavior, but its meaning can only be exercised by agency or agent. This process which is the formation process of the corporate, is namely resolutions of general meeting of shareholders. On the other hand, resolutions of general meeting of shareholders is the system of the meaning of the majority of the investors (or shareholders) as a single group. Therefore, resolutions of general meeting of shareholders shall be lawful and just in the content and procedure. If content or procedure of the resolution is flawed, it can not be regarded as a legitimate group meaning, and its effectiveness should also be denied. The resolution of general meeting as a corporate legal act will involve the meaning and interests of the majority of people in its formation process, and the resolution was formed, on this basis, it will form a variety of follow-up behavior. If we solve the problem through invalid and revocation of civil behavior, it will not only lead to the stability of the legal relationship of the group, but also may harm the interests of others. At present, resolutions of general meeting of shareholders was be divided into invalidation and revocation. In fact, the court showed different results in the determination of the validity of the resolution of general meeting of shareholders because of the system level and the current law is not perfect. Based on this issue, in April 12 2016, the Supreme People's Court which issued "a number of issues relating to the application of the corporation law of the people's Republic of China (4) (Draft)", has set up a new regulation to valid confirmation lawsuit, nonexistent lawsuit and forming not an valid resolution and so on. This makes up for the shortcomings of the existing law on the validity of the resolution, but there are still some problems. Therefore, this article attempts to elaborate and analyse the type of defects of resolutions of general meeting of shareholders on the "corporation law" and the relevant provisions, analysis, and further review the existing problems in China's legislation and put forward the perfect place.

중국어

法人作为法律上拟制的主体，尽管具有意思能力和行为能力，但其意思只能通过机关或代理人行使，这一过程即是公司意思形成过程，也即是股东会决议。另一方面，股东会决议是把多数出资者（或股东）的意思作为单一团体意思的制度。因而，在股东会决议的内容和程序上，应当合法、公正。若决议的内容或程序存在瑕疵，则就不能视为正当的团体意思，其效力也应被否定。股东会决议作为社团性的法律行为，在其成立过程中会涉及到多数人的意思与利害关系，且决议被形成后，以决议的有效为前提又会形成各种后续行为，若通过瑕疵民事行为的无效与撤销法理来解决，不仅会导致团体法律关系的稳定性，也可能会损害他人的利益。对于股东会决议瑕疵的效力，目前我国《公司法》所采取的是“二分法”，即股东会决议无效之诉与股东会决议撤销之诉。实务中，由于制度层面及现行法的不完善，导致法院在股东会决议瑕疵效力的认定上呈现出不同的结果。基于这一问题，2016年4月12日，最高人民法院发布了《关于适用<中华人民共和国公司法>若干问题的规定（四）>》（征求意见稿），对于股东会决议瑕疵的效力，采取了“四分法”，即 决议确认之诉、决议撤销之诉、决议不存在之诉与未形成有效决议之诉。这在一定程度上弥补了现行法对决议瑕疵效力规定的不足，但仍存在一定问题。因此，本文试图通过对《公司法》及其相关规定上股东会决议瑕疵类型的阐述、分析，来进一步检讨我国立法上存在的问题并提出完善之处。