本文選題：補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任 + 瑕疵出資��； 參考：《華中師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：根據(jù)《公司法司法解釋(三)》13、14條的規(guī)定,當(dāng)公司不能清償債務(wù)時(shí),沒(méi)有履行出資義務(wù)的股東以及尚未完全履行出資義務(wù)的股東應(yīng)以其未出資本息為限對(duì)公司債權(quán)人承擔(dān)補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任,抽逃出資的股東以其抽逃出資本息為限對(duì)公司債權(quán)人承擔(dān)補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任。上述規(guī)定突破了傳統(tǒng)公司法的思維方式,既沒(méi)有否定公司法律人格的獨(dú)立性,又要求股東對(duì)公司債權(quán)人承擔(dān)責(zé)任�，F(xiàn)行立法對(duì)股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的規(guī)定尚不詳盡,本文試從考察股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的理論基礎(chǔ)入手,對(duì)股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的性質(zhì)、認(rèn)定以及責(zé)任的承擔(dān)問(wèn)題進(jìn)行探討,并嘗試針對(duì)現(xiàn)行立法中的空白與不足之處提出可供借鑒的改進(jìn)辦法,以期對(duì)將來(lái)進(jìn)一步完善股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任有所助益。除去引言,本文共分為五個(gè)部分。導(dǎo)言部分簡(jiǎn)要說(shuō)明了選題背景。第一部分是對(duì)股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的理論概述。具體內(nèi)容包括:股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的法律特征、理論意義與實(shí)踐價(jià)值。本文第二部分討論了股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的定性問(wèn)題。在介紹和分析擔(dān)保責(zé)任說(shuō)、第三人侵害債權(quán)說(shuō)、為損害結(jié)果創(chuàng)造條件說(shuō)和債權(quán)人代位權(quán)說(shuō)等學(xué)界主要觀點(diǎn)的基礎(chǔ)上,論述了自己的觀點(diǎn):雖然從立法層面上看,《公司法司法解釋(三)》對(duì)股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的規(guī)定與我國(guó)《合同法》及其司法解釋中的債權(quán)人代位權(quán)規(guī)定存在一定的差別,但從理論層面看,以民法學(xué)上的代位權(quán)理論來(lái)解釋股東的補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任仍然具有合理性。第三部分討論了股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的認(rèn)定問(wèn)題。重點(diǎn)對(duì)“公司債務(wù)不能清償”,“未履行或未全面履行出資義務(wù)”以及“抽逃出資”的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)展開(kāi)了詳細(xì)的分析。最終得出結(jié)論:在一般情形下,僅當(dāng)債權(quán)人對(duì)公司提起訴訟,且公司經(jīng)過(guò)強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行程序后仍然不能償還到期債務(wù),方可認(rèn)定構(gòu)成“公司債務(wù)不能清償”。但是在少數(shù)特殊情形下,則只要符合公司沒(méi)有如期清償?shù)狡趥鶆?wù)這一條件即可。對(duì)“未履行或未全面履行出資義務(wù)”的認(rèn)定采取狹義的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為宜,即應(yīng)當(dāng)將股東因出資期限未至而未履行出資義務(wù)的情形排除在外。對(duì)“抽逃出資”的認(rèn)定則需要嚴(yán)格按照《公司法司法解釋(三)》第12條的規(guī)定,從行為方式與行為后果兩方面進(jìn)行認(rèn)定,不僅要求股東的行為方式符合該條文所列舉的四種情形,而且要產(chǎn)生損害公司權(quán)益的行為后果。第四部分對(duì)股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的承擔(dān)問(wèn)題進(jìn)行了論述。在股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的請(qǐng)求權(quán)主體方面,筆者認(rèn)為應(yīng)對(duì)內(nèi)部股東債權(quán)人和部分外部債權(quán)人設(shè)置一定的限制條件。在股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的承擔(dān)主體方面,筆者重點(diǎn)對(duì)公司發(fā)起人和瑕疵股權(quán)受讓人連帶承擔(dān)補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的條件進(jìn)行了分析,并論述了不同責(zé)任主體在責(zé)任承擔(dān)方面的差異。第五部分討論了股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任的范圍問(wèn)題。主要論證了股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任不具有內(nèi)部連帶性,并說(shuō)明了“未出資本息”和“抽逃出資本息”的計(jì)算方法。
[Abstract]:According to the provisions of the company law judicial interpretation (three) >13,14, when the company is unable to repay the debt, the shareholders who do not fulfill the obligation of capital contribution and the shareholders who have not fully fulfilled their capital contribution should take the supplementary liability to the creditors of the company in the case of their outstanding capital and interest. The right holder is responsible for the supplementary compensation. The above regulations break through the traditional way of thinking of the company law, neither deny the independence of the legal personality of the company, but also require the shareholders to take responsibility for the creditors of the company. The provisions of the current legislation on the liability for supplementary compensation for the shareholders are not yet detailed. This article tries to start with the theoretical basis of investigating the liability of the shareholders' supplementary compensation. In order to further improve the liability for supplementary compensation for shareholders in the future, this paper is divided into five parts. The introduction is brief. The first part is the theoretical overview of the liability for supplementary compensation for shareholders. The specific content includes: the legal characteristics of the liability for supplementary compensation for shareholders, the theoretical significance and the practical value. The second part of this paper discusses the qualitative problem of the liability for supplementary compensation for the shareholders. In the introduction and analysis of the liability for security, the third party infringes the creditor's claim and is damaged. On the basis of the main viewpoints of the creation conditions of the result creation and the right of the creditor's subrogation, the author expounds his own views: although from the legislative level, there are some differences between the provisions of the judicial interpretation of the company law (three) > the liability for the supplementary compensation for the shareholders and the stipulations of the creditor subrogation in the contract law and the judicial interpretation of our country. On the other hand, the theory of subrogation in civil law is still reasonable to explain the liability of the shareholders. The third part discusses the identification of the liability for the supplementary compensation of the shareholders. The final conclusion is that in the general case, only when the creditor brings a lawsuit to the company and the company is still unable to repay the maturity debt after the enforcement of the procedure, it can be found to constitute "the liability of the company can not be liquidated". But in a few special cases, it is only in conformity with the company's absence of due debt due to maturity. It is appropriate to adopt a narrow sense of identification standard for "unfulfilled or not fully fulfilled capital contribution obligation", that is, the situation that the shareholders should not be funded due to the time limit of capital contribution should be excluded. The identification of "capital contribution" should be strictly in accordance with the regulations of the judicial interpretation of the company law (three) and twelfth. And the two aspects of the consequences of the behavior, not only requires the behavior of shareholders to comply with the four cases listed in the provisions, but also to produce the consequences of the damage to the rights and interests of the company. The fourth part of the shareholder's liability for supplementary compensation is discussed. The internal shareholders' creditors and some external creditors set certain restrictions. In the subject of the liability of the shareholders' supplementary compensation, the author focuses on the analysis of the conditions for the joint liability of the sponsors and the defective shares of the transferee of the defective shares, and discusses the differences in the responsibility of the different subjects of responsibility. Fifth This paper discusses the scope of the liability for supplementary compensation for shareholders. It mainly demonstrates that the liability for supplementary compensation for shareholders does not have internal joint property, and explains the calculation method of "non capital contribution and interest" and "escape capital interest".
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張其鑒;;論認(rèn)繳制下股東補(bǔ)充賠償責(zé)任中的“不能清償”標(biāo)準(zhǔn)——基于回歸公司法立場(chǎng)的分析[J];政治與法律;2017年03期

2 付慧姝;范成龍;;股東出資責(zé)任加速到期制度的法律適用[J];江西社會(huì)科學(xué);2016年12期

3 章恒筑;王軍;葉林;劉建功;王建文;鐘毅;王富博;鄧峰;蔣大興;王松;吳兆祥;段曉娟;李后龍;曾宏偉;李志剛;;認(rèn)繳資本制度下的債權(quán)人訴訟救濟(jì)[J];人民司法(應(yīng)用);2016年16期

4 周s，

本文編號(hào)：1974349