摘要
我国《公司法》经过2014年的修改,自“部分的认缴制”改为“完全的认缴制”,引发如下问题:股权转让时出资义务尚未届期,转让股东是否需要继续承担该未届期出资义务。对此,司法实践以及学界主要存在“单独承担模式”与“共同承担模式”的不同规制路径:前者要求受让股东单独承担该义务,后者则要求转让股东与受让股东共同承担该义务。检讨既有的规制路径,可以发现在通常情形中股东退出机制的保障功能更值得尊重,而债权人保护的需求则仅在例外情形中才显其正当性。《公司法》草案第89条第1款明确规定了“单独承担模式”,而作为例外的“共同承担模式”则需要体系化地适用第48条与第89条第2款才能得以实现。
Company Law of China was revised in 2014,changing the partial subscription system into a full subscription system.Once the statutory time limit for shareholders’capital contributions is abolished,the shares may be transferred when the capital contribution has not yet expired.Therefore,it is always discussed whether the transferor needs to continue to bear the unpaid capital contribution obligations.In judicial practice and legal theory,there are two different regulatory paths,which are the“individual liability mode”and the“joint liability mode”.By analyzing the value judgments of different regulatory paths,it is found that the withdrawal of shareholder is more worthy,while the protection for creditors is only justified in exceptional cases.Paragraph 1 of Article 89 of the draft Company Law clearly stipulates the“individual liability model”,and the“joint liability model”needs to be applied as an exception,systematically cooperating with Article 48 and Paragraph 2 of Article 89.
作者
陈景善
郜俊辉
Chen Jingshan;Gao Junhui(Civil,Commercial and Economic Law School of the China University of Political Science and Law;Waseda University of Japan)
出处
《国家检察官学院学报》
CSSCI
北大核心
2022年第6期114-127,共14页
Journal of National Prosecutors College
基金
司法部国家法治与法学理论研究一般项目“商事外观主义研究”(19SFB2041)
国家留学基金委员会“国家建设高水平大学公派研究生项目”的阶段性成果
关键词
认缴制
单独承担
未届期
共同承担
Subscription System
Solitary Liability
Time Limit Unexpired
Joint Liability
作者简介
陈景善,中国政法大学民商经济法学院教授、博士生导师;郜俊辉,日本早稻田大学法学研究科民商法博士研究生。
