本文選題：瑕疵出資 + 差額補(bǔ)繳責(zé)任�。� 參考：《南京大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：瑕疵出資,是指公司法、出資協(xié)議或公司章程對(duì)股東出資義務(wù)做了明確規(guī)定的情況下,股東出資不符合規(guī)定的行為。瑕疵出資可以分為：明確的不履行出資、欺詐性出資、出資不適當(dāng)。一方面,出資是股東的基本義務(wù),瑕疵出資行為違反法律之強(qiáng)制行規(guī)定,我國法律對(duì)瑕疵出資設(shè)定了嚴(yán)格的公法責(zé)任。另一方面,股東資格的獲得并不以出資為對(duì)價(jià),作為股權(quán)基本權(quán)能的轉(zhuǎn)讓權(quán)不因瑕疵出資之存在而喪失,瑕疵出資股權(quán)的可轉(zhuǎn)讓使得瑕疵出資所產(chǎn)生的法律責(zé)任打破原有公司法之制度設(shè)計(jì)。實(shí)務(wù)中基于瑕疵出資而產(chǎn)生的民事責(zé)任訴訟一直存在,各地法院所采用的態(tài)度也多有不同。2005年修訂《中華人民共和國公司法》(以下稱《公司法》)對(duì)于瑕疵出資民事責(zé)任的規(guī)定重公法責(zé)任輕民事責(zé)任,使得各地法院適用不一致問題并沒有得到解決。2010年《關(guān)于適用中華人民共和國公司法的若干規(guī)定(三)》(以下稱《若干規(guī)定(三)》)對(duì)瑕疵出資問題做了較為全面的規(guī)定,瑕疵出資而產(chǎn)生的各類民事法律責(zé)任基本完備。 《若干規(guī)定(三)》對(duì)瑕疵出資的民事責(zé)任可以劃分為三類主體責(zé)任：瑕疵出資人的民事責(zé)任、其他股東對(duì)公司的資本充實(shí)責(zé)任瑕疵出資人及其他關(guān)系人對(duì)債權(quán)人就瑕疵出資而承擔(dān)的瑕疵出資范圍內(nèi)的補(bǔ)充連帶責(zé)任。《若干規(guī)定(三)》對(duì)瑕疵出資民事責(zé)任的規(guī)定彌補(bǔ)了《公司法》對(duì)民事責(zé)任規(guī)范不足的缺憾,在一定程度上遏制了我國瑕疵出資泛濫甚至潛規(guī)則劃的現(xiàn)象,有利于統(tǒng)一各地法院司法。但是現(xiàn)行公司法對(duì)于瑕疵出資民事責(zé)任的規(guī)定仍存在下列不足：瑕疵出資民事責(zé)任制度設(shè)計(jì)上,從靜態(tài)上的法律關(guān)系出發(fā),忽視了瑕疵出資由于具有可轉(zhuǎn)讓性而導(dǎo)致的責(zé)任主體動(dòng)態(tài)化發(fā)展過程；現(xiàn)行瑕疵出資所引發(fā)的資本充實(shí)責(zé)任和外部債權(quán)人利益保護(hù)責(zé)任體系完全重合；《若干規(guī)定(三)》規(guī)定了瑕疵出資可能引發(fā)的各類責(zé)任、責(zé)任主體、擔(dān)責(zé)方式但在制度設(shè)計(jì)上比較粗糙不利于法律的適用；我國現(xiàn)行公司法在瑕疵出資的法律責(zé)任制度設(shè)計(jì)上并沒有區(qū)分有限公司和股份有限公司的不同,采用統(tǒng)一的規(guī)定 文章通過兩個(gè)案例引出瑕疵出資民事責(zé)任在現(xiàn)行法律制度下的解決之道及可能存在的問題,將現(xiàn)有學(xué)界的研究成果加以梳理。針對(duì)如何完善瑕疵才出資民事責(zé)任和建立各有側(cè)重、有所區(qū)分的瑕疵出資民事責(zé)任體系文章分四部分展開論述：第一章筆者對(duì)現(xiàn)有瑕疵出資各類民事責(zé)任重新界定,梳理我國現(xiàn)行責(zé)任體系并加以評(píng)述。第二章筆者著重分下了瑕疵出資人的民事責(zé)任。包括瑕疵出資人公司的差額補(bǔ)充責(zé)任及制度完善和瑕疵出資人對(duì)債權(quán)人承擔(dān)責(zé)任的性質(zhì)。第三章筆者者對(duì)瑕疵出資受讓人的民事責(zé)任進(jìn)行分析。主要包括瑕疵出資受讓人承擔(dān)資本充實(shí)責(zé)任的性質(zhì)和條件,瑕疵出資受讓人對(duì)債權(quán)人承擔(dān)責(zé)任的性質(zhì)和條件,瑕疵出資轉(zhuǎn)讓人和受讓人之間的契約責(zé)任。第四章分析了現(xiàn)有資本充實(shí)責(zé)任體系和債權(quán)人利益保護(hù)責(zé)任體系。通過制度設(shè)計(jì)力圖打破現(xiàn)在有倆責(zé)任體系相互重合的狀況。對(duì)內(nèi)部責(zé)任堅(jiān)持過錯(cuò)原則,對(duì)外部堅(jiān)持嚴(yán)格責(zé)任原則,并通過外部嚴(yán)格責(zé)任的限定來督促內(nèi)部資本充實(shí)的維持。通過該制度設(shè)計(jì)以達(dá)到衡平多方主體利益、方便法律適用和規(guī)范公司組織制度的多方共贏。 文章認(rèn)為,瑕疵出資所產(chǎn)生的民事責(zé)任主要包括三種責(zé)任：瑕疵出資人民事責(zé)任、公司資本充實(shí)責(zé)任、外部債權(quán)人利益保護(hù)責(zé)任。瑕疵出資人由于作為所有民事責(zé)任產(chǎn)生的始作俑者,將其責(zé)任單獨(dú)歸為一類,其中最為主要的是瑕疵出資人對(duì)公司的差額補(bǔ)充責(zé)任和對(duì)債權(quán)人的賠償責(zé)任。公司資本充實(shí)責(zé)任包含出瑕疵出資人以外的其他主體因不同法律關(guān)系對(duì)公司產(chǎn)生的民事責(zé)任。債權(quán)人利益保護(hù)的責(zé)任是在公司資本充實(shí)制度要求下,有全體登記在冊(cè)股東對(duì)外部債權(quán)人所承擔(dān)的民事責(zé)任。三種責(zé)任制度的重新設(shè)計(jì),打破了《若干規(guī)定(三)》中對(duì)內(nèi)責(zé)任和對(duì)外責(zé)任完全一致的情況,既尊重公司內(nèi)部的意思自知和矛盾的私權(quán)救濟(jì),又充分衡平了三方主體的利益并通過外部責(zé)任的強(qiáng)化督促內(nèi)部組織和管理的完善。同時(shí)明確三類責(zé)任體系簡化了法院的訴訟,嚴(yán)格責(zé)任保護(hù)債權(quán)人利益減輕了債權(quán)人的舉證負(fù)擔(dān)和法院的證據(jù)判斷。對(duì)內(nèi)部自知的肯定提高了法院判決的執(zhí)行力。
[Abstract]:A defective capital contribution refers to the behavior that the shareholder's contribution does not conform to the provisions of the company law, the capital contribution agreement or the articles of association of the company to the shareholders' contribution obligations. The defective capital contribution can be divided into a clear non performance contribution, a fraudulent capital contribution and an inappropriate capital contribution. On the one hand, the capital is the basic obligation of the shareholders, and the defective investment behavior violates the law. On the other hand, the transfer right of the basic right of equity is not lost because of the existence of the defective capital contribution, and the transferability of the defective capital contribution makes the legal liability for the defective capital contribution break the original public liability. The system of judicature is designed. In practice, the civil liability litigation based on the defective capital contribution has always existed. The attitudes adopted by the courts in various places also have different.2005 years' revision of the People's Republic of China Company Law (hereinafter referred to as the company law) for the civil liability of the defective capital contribution and the civil liability of the public law, which makes the courts all over the country applicable. The problem of inconsistency has not been solved in.2010 < (three) > (three) > (hereinafter referred to as < some regulations (three)) to make a more comprehensive provision on the problem of defective capital contribution, and all kinds of civil legal liabilities arising from the defective capital contribution are basically complete.
< a number of regulations (three) > the civil liability for the defective capital contribution can be divided into three types of main responsibilities: the civil liability of the defective contributor, the other shareholders' liability for the company's capital enrichment liability and the supplementary joint liability within the scope of the defect capital contribution to the creditor's contribution to the defect. < several regulations (three) > to the defect. The provisions of civil liability for defective capital contribution make up for the defects of the lack of the code for the civil liability of the company law, to a certain extent, to a certain extent, to contain the phenomenon of the spread of the defective capital and even the submersible rules in our country, which is beneficial to the unification of the courts of the courts in various parts of the country. However, the following deficiencies still exist in the provisions of the current corporate law on the civil liability for the defective contribution: the defective contributive people In the design of the system of responsibility, from the static legal relationship, it ignores the dynamic development process of the liability subject caused by the transferability of the defective capital contribution; the current liability for capital enrichment caused by the defective capital contribution and the responsibility system for the protection of the interests of the external creditors completely coincide; < some regulations (three) > stipulates the defective capital contribution. The various kinds of responsibility, the subject of responsibility, the way of responsibility, but the relatively rough system design is not good for the application of the law. The current company law in our country does not distinguish the difference between the limited company and the Limited by Share Ltd in the design of the legal responsibility system of the defective capital contribution, and adopts the unified regulations.
Through two cases, the article leads to the solution of the civil liability for defective capital contribution in the current legal system and the possible problems, and combs the research achievements of the existing academic circles. The article is divided into four parts of the civil liability system of the defective contribution to the civil liability and the establishment of the civil liability system of the defective investment. In the first chapter, the author redefines the existing civil liability for all kinds of defects, combs the current responsibility system of our country and reviews it. The second chapter emphatically divides the civil liability of the defective contributor, including the supplementary liability and the system perfection of the defective contributor company and the nature of the liability for the creditors of the defective contributor. In the third chapter, the author analyzes the civil liability of the transferee of the defective capital contribution, mainly including the nature and conditions of the liability for capital enrichment by the assignee of the defective capital contribution, the nature and conditions of the obligee's liability to the creditor and the contractual liability of the transferee and the transferee. The fourth chapter analyses the existing capital charge. The system of real responsibility and the responsibility system of protecting the interests of the creditors. Through the system design, it tries to break the situation of the mutual coincidence of the two liability systems. The principle of internal responsibility is adhered to the principle of fault, the principle of strict responsibility is adhered to outside, and the internal capital is maintained through the strict external responsibility. Balancing the interests of various parties facilitates win-win application of laws and standardizing the company's organizational system.
The article holds that the civil liability produced by the defective capital contribution mainly includes three kinds of responsibilities: the defective capital contribution to the people's responsibility, the company capital fulfilling responsibility and the external creditor's interests protection responsibility. The defective contributor, as the initiator of all civil liability, will return its liability alone into one category, the most important of which is the defective capital contribution. A person's liability for the balance of the company's balance and the liability for the creditor. The liability of the company's capital enrichment responsibility includes the civil liability of the other subjects other than the defective contributor for the company due to different legal relations. The liability of the creditor's interest protection is under the requirement of the company's capital enrichment system, with the external claims of all registered shareholders. The redesign of the three liability systems has broken the circumstances in which the internal responsibility and the external responsibility are completely consistent in some provisions (three), respecting the private right to self-awareness and contradiction within the company, and the balance of the interests of the three parties and the strengthening of internal organization and management through the strengthening of external responsibility. At the same time, it is clear that the three type of liability system simplifies the court's lawsuit, the strict responsibility to protect the creditor's interests reduces the burden of proof of the creditor and the judgment of the court. The internal self-knowledge certainly improves the execution of the court's judgment.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 朱慈蘊(yùn);我國《公司法》應(yīng)確立揭開公司面紗規(guī)則[J];法律適用;2005年03期

2 古錫麟;李洪堂;;股權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓若干審判實(shí)務(wù)問題[J];法律適用;2007年03期

3 劉俊海;;論抽逃出資股東的民事責(zé)任[J];法學(xué)雜志;2008年01期

4 馮果;論公司股東與發(fā)起人的出資責(zé)任[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;1999年03期

5 周友蘇;;試析股東資格認(rèn)定中的若干法律問題[J];法學(xué);2006年12期

6 朱慶;;股東出資義務(wù)與訴訟時(shí)效的關(guān)系[J];法學(xué);2008年04期

7 張芳;;試論我國公司法上資本充實(shí)責(zé)任制度之完善[J];消費(fèi)導(dǎo)刊;2009年21期

8 趙旭東;從資本信用到資產(chǎn)信用[J];法學(xué)研究;2003年05期

9 弗蘭克H.伊斯特布魯克;丹尼爾R.費(fèi)雪;黃輝;;公司契約論[J];清華法學(xué);2007年04期

10 陽子龍,王歷勝;論出資瑕疵股東對(duì)公司債權(quán)人的民事責(zé)任[J];企業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì);2005年05期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 邱隆芬;[N];人民法院報(bào);2005年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 崔曉冉;公司瑕疵出資人股權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓問題研究[D];山東大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：1906521