초록 close

Before the year 1980s, it was general situation that the right of corporate control was guarantee.And in the eye of the law, Hostile Takeover was prohibit. In the year 1990's it was permitted, manycorporations used to Hostile Takeover. After the year 2000s, increase it. On the contrary, theDefenses are forbid. But problems of the Hostile Takeover is revealed on the corporate raider speculate on gambling,specially foreigners attack in waves. For example Sovereign Global Investment purchased 14.99%stock of the SK Corporation and GMO(Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo & Co. LLC) EmergingFund bought 11% share of the Hyundai Elevator Co.,Ltd. So economic organization as the KoreaChamber of Commerce and Industry and the Federation of Korean Industries demand legislationon the Defenses against Hostile Takeover. The outstanding legal problem on the Defenses against Hostile Takeover are permission of thedefenses and agreement of interests between attacker and defender. A view in the affirmative insist on the target corporation of the manager as officer and directorcan defense against Hostile Takeover base on business judgment. On the contrary, a opinion in thenegative persist in objection. I think that the Defense against Hostile Takeover have to permit, on condition that manager's act with fiduciary duty and business judgment rule. But it have to prohibit, is of private business for his own interest like a protecting for his corporate control right. In the existing law, method of defenses have application to treasury shares and payment of retirement grants and rewards. But it is desirable that legislate on the defenses against Hostile Takeover such as shark repellant charter amendments, staggered board, lock-in provisions, fair-price charter amendment, white squire, poison pills, white knight, crown jewels, green-mail, standstill-agreement, golden parachute, pac-man defense and so on.