企業重建之和解程序再建構

Abstract

本文以和解程序於企業再建之運用為重心，從現行和解程序出發，藉由比較和解程序與其他債務清理法制，探討和解程序應發揮之功能與角色。再透過和解許可裁定之研究觀察股份有限公司、有限公司以及商號和解聲請人聲請時之資本額、負債以及財產等基本資料、聲請人所提出之和解方案內容以及法院審查之理由及結果。發現法院嚴格之審查標準、有擔保債權人地位以及現行制度上對於新資金挹注之欠缺為企業聲請人運用和解程序主要之障礙。對於實務上之困境，本文以民事再生法作為我國和解程序之借鑑。藉由分析民事再生程序之聲請及開啟，深入瞭解民事再生程序如何在聲請時如何於保障債權人權益同時，開啟債務人及債權人間就債務進行協商之可能，並比較民事再生法上制衡有擔保債權人之制度以及新資金取得之方法。最終認為就我國和解程序上之問題，在法院審理上應避免以多數債權人意見為主，並建議對於新資金提供者以及有擔保債權人提供適度之保障與制衡之制度。

This article focuses on the use of reconciliation process in enterprise restructuring, and explores the functions and roles of reconciliation process by comparing them with other debt settlement process, reorganization process for example. Through the study, we observe the basic information the claimants, including the capital, liabilities, and property as well as the content of the reconciliation proposal proposed by the claimants, and result and reasoning of the court's review. It was found that the court's strict standard and the lack of new capital injection under the current system are the main obstacles for claimants to use the process. In view of the practical difficulties, this article uses the Civil Rehabilitation Act as a reference. By analyzing the claiming and opening of the Civil Rehabilitation Act, we will gain insight into how the process can protect the minimum liquidation value of creditors while opening the possibility of debt negotiation between debtors and creditors, meanwhile balancing the interest of secured creditors new funders under the Civil Rehabilitation Act. In the end, it is suggested that the court should avoid depending on the opinion of majority creditors and consider the rights and interests of minority creditors while providing appropriate protection for new fund providers and secured creditors.