메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
고려대학교 법학연구원 고려법학 고려법학 제56호
발행연도
2010.1
수록면
613 - 657 (45page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
This article deals with valuation issues in bankruptcy cases. The Bankruptcy and Reorganization Law mandates that the case trustee and court-appointed inspector assess both the enterprise value and the asset-by-asset value of the debtor. The result of the valuation plays a critical role in many stages of a reorganization proceeding. There are two different approaches to valuation: the value of an individual property and the value of an enterprise as a whole. The issue of asset-by-asset valuation arises in deciding the amount of the secured claim or confirming a reorganization plan in a cram-down. A creditor whose debt is only partially secured has two claims: a secured claim measured by the value of its collateral and unsecured claim for the remainder. Also, a plan may be confirmed over a dissenting secured class, if it provides the class with the amount equal to the fair value of the collateral. In both of the above situation, this article concludes that the value of the collateral should be its fair market value, not the liquidation value. Enterprise value falls into three categories: going-concern value,liquidation value and asset value. There are several methods that are widely used to fix the going concern value: discounted cash flow analysis(DCF), comparable company analysis, comparable transaction analysis and so on. The Judicial Guideline for Reorganization Case Management (In Korean, “회생사건의 처리에 관한 예규”) provides that DCF be exclusively used. However, there is no justification that the Guideline prescribes any specific method or DCF is superior to other methods, so this part of the Guideline should be abolished. The Bankruptcy and Reorganization Law obliges the court to order the closure of a reorganization case when it finds that the liquidation value exceeds the going-concern value. In the absence of an actual sale, going-concern value is an estimated present value of the debtor's projected cash generation. As a result, its valuation is necessarily subjective and hypothetical. It is pointless that the law or state dictates the fate of a private business entity based on a simple comparison between the going concern value and the liquidation value. The Bankruptcy and Reorganization Law states that, when the debt exceeds the asset value of the debtor, the equity holders have no vote in the planning and the face value of the equity be depreciated to less than a half in the reorganization plan. This article concludes that the going concern value, not the asset value, should be compared with the debt, because going concern value is a business' enterprise value as a continuing operation.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (18)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0