本文關(guān)鍵詞： 股東出資 出資義務(wù) 加速到期　出處：《吉林大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：保護(hù)公司、股東以及債權(quán)人的合法利益是現(xiàn)代公司法立法的重要宗旨。在公司司法實(shí)踐中,各主體之間的利益會發(fā)生一定的沖突,這就需要法律做出衡平保護(hù)各商事主體的合法利益。公司資本制度改革后,公司債權(quán)人保護(hù)面臨新的挑戰(zhàn)。本文試對“香通公司訴昊躍公司股權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓案”進(jìn)行分析論證,從香通公司的訴訟請求出發(fā),以香通公司能否請求昊躍公司承擔(dān)責(zé)任、香通公司能否請求昊躍公司股東承擔(dān)責(zé)任為切入點(diǎn),對該案例進(jìn)行分析,試圖解釋認(rèn)繳資本制之下股東出資義務(wù)與債權(quán)人保護(hù)問題。香通公司與昊躍公司簽訂的《股權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓協(xié)議》依法成立并且有效,轉(zhuǎn)讓方香通公司在合同約定的期限內(nèi)完成了股權(quán)交付并且變更了工商登記,受讓方昊躍公司理應(yīng)按照合同支付股權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓款,香通公司請求昊躍公司承擔(dān)責(zé)任應(yīng)該得到支持。香通公司能否請求昊躍公司股東承擔(dān)責(zé)任成為案件爭論的焦點(diǎn)問題。公司注冊資本制度在《公司法》修訂之后體現(xiàn)出巨大的變化,股東出資被賦予更高的自主性,股東出資既不被限制最低額度,又可以完全自主決定出資的期限。當(dāng)公司不能償還公司債權(quán)人到期的合法債務(wù)之時(shí),非破產(chǎn)的場合下股東出資義務(wù)是否應(yīng)該加速到期以清償公司債務(wù)成為理論與實(shí)踐中急需解決的問題。股東出資義務(wù)兼具法定性與約定性。關(guān)于股東出資期限的約定屬于股東與公司之間,股東與股東之間的一種內(nèi)部約定,這種內(nèi)部約定所賦予股東的期限利益并不能適用于外部關(guān)系。股東出資義務(wù)的法定性決定了股東對于出資義務(wù)的履行不能按照一般債權(quán)來加以理解,公司是法人組織,股東出資是公司財(cái)產(chǎn)的重要組成部分,股東出資的履行情況關(guān)系到公司的發(fā)展,因此當(dāng)公司面對到期債務(wù)難以清償時(shí),股東不能以其對公司的出資義務(wù)尚未到期為由進(jìn)行抗辯。股東在公司設(shè)立之初所認(rèn)繳的出資在其認(rèn)繳之日起就應(yīng)視為公司的財(cái)產(chǎn),股東因享有期限利益而不需要即時(shí)繳付,但是當(dāng)公司遇到不能清償債務(wù)的狀況之時(shí),股東應(yīng)提前完成出資的義務(wù),無條件的將原就屬于公司的財(cái)產(chǎn)歸還于公司以清償債務(wù)�？偠灾�,在非破產(chǎn)場合下肯定股東出資義務(wù)加速到期,既保護(hù)了債權(quán)人合法利益,又使公司免于陷入破產(chǎn),是為一條高效合理的路徑。因此香通公司請求昊躍公司股東承擔(dān)責(zé)任也應(yīng)該得到支持。為了避免股東之間惡意串通,惡意利用其對出資期限與金額的自主權(quán),故而應(yīng)判定昊躍公司新老四位股東在未出資本息范圍內(nèi)對香通公司承擔(dān)責(zé)任。出于對公司效率與自治的考慮,昊躍公司的減資行為應(yīng)認(rèn)定有效,但是其瑕疵亦是不可忽略,其減資行為對已知債權(quán)人香通公司并不產(chǎn)生對抗效力,昊躍公司各股東仍應(yīng)以減資前的認(rèn)繳出資為限對香通公司承擔(dān)責(zé)任。
[Abstract]:Protecting the legitimate interests of companies, shareholders and creditors is an important purpose of modern company law legislation. In the judicial practice of companies, there will be certain conflicts between the interests of various subjects. This requires the law to balance the protection of the legitimate interests of commercial subjects. After the reform of the company's capital system. The company creditor protection faces new challenge. This article tries to "Xiangtong Company v. Haoyue Company equity transfer case" for analysis and argumentation, proceeding from the lawsuit request of Xiangtong Company. This paper analyzes the case by whether Xiangtong Company can ask Haoyue Company to assume responsibility, and whether Xiangtong Company can ask the shareholders of Haoyue Company to assume responsibility as a starting point. This paper tries to explain the obligation of shareholders' contribution and the protection of creditors under the system of subscription capital. The "share transfer Agreement" signed between Xiangtong and Haoyue Company is established and effective according to law. The transferor Xiangtong Company completed the delivery of the shares and changed the industrial and commercial registration within the time limit stipulated in the contract, and the transferor Fang Haoyue Company shall pay the share transfer amount in accordance with the contract. Xiangtong's request to Haoyue to assume responsibility should be supported. Whether Xiangtong can ask its shareholders to assume responsibility has become the focus of controversy in the case. The Company's registered Capital system after the revision of the Company Law. Showing great changes. Shareholders are given a higher degree of autonomy, shareholders are not limited to the minimum amount of capital, but also can completely determine the time limit of the contribution, when the company can not repay the company creditors due legal debt. It is urgent to solve the problem in theory and practice whether or not the shareholder's obligation of capital contribution should be matured in order to pay off the company's debt under the circumstance of non-bankruptcy. The obligation of shareholder's contribution is both legal and agreed. On the term of shareholder's contribution. It must be between the shareholders and the company. An internal agreement between shareholders and shareholders. The term benefits of this kind of internal agreement can not be applied to the external relationship. The legal nature of the shareholder's contribution obligation determines that the shareholder's performance of the investment obligation can not be understood according to the general creditor's rights. The company is a legal person organization, the shareholder contribution is an important part of the company property, the performance of the shareholder contribution is related to the development of the company, so when the company is faced with the debt due is difficult to pay off. Shareholders may not plead on the ground that their obligation to contribute to the company has not yet expired. The contributions subscribed by shareholders at the beginning of the establishment of the company shall be regarded as the property of the company from the date of their subscription. Shareholders do not need to pay immediately because they enjoy the benefits of the term, but when the company encounters a situation where the company is unable to pay off its debts, the shareholder shall fulfill his obligation to contribute in advance. In short, in the case of non-bankruptcy, the affirmation of the acceleration of the maturity of the shareholder's contribution obligations, both protect the legitimate interests of creditors. It is an efficient and reasonable way to prevent the company from falling into bankruptcy. Therefore, Xiangtong should also be supported to ask its shareholders to assume responsibility. In order to avoid malicious collusion between shareholders. Maliciously taking advantage of its autonomy on the duration and amount of capital contribution, it should be decided that the new and old four shareholders of Haoyue Company should be held responsible for Xiangtong Company within the scope of unfunded principal and interest, and out of consideration of the efficiency and autonomy of the company. The capital reduction behavior of Haoyue Company should be considered as effective, but its defects can not be ignored, and its capital reduction behavior does not have antagonistic effect on known creditor Xiangtong Company. The shareholders of Haoyue Company should still be held responsible to Xiangtong Company by subscribing to the capital contribution before the capital reduction.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 蒯本清;論非破產(chǎn)場合下未出資股東對債權(quán)人的責(zé)任[D];華東政法大學(xué);2016年

2 葉傲雪;股東出資義務(wù)的理性解讀[D];華東政法大學(xué);2015年

3 劉曉;論股東瑕疵出資的民事責(zé)任[D];鄭州大學(xué);2015年

，

本文編號：1478374