从公司法法理看一人公司

【作者】 胡铁；

【导师】 焦津洪；

【作者基本信息】 对外经济贸易大学 ， 法律， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 中国有众多的中小业者，他们在整个国家的经济中正在扮演着越来越重要的角色。为了规避公司法对于设立公司须有复数股东的要求，在现实生活中存在着许多实质性一人公司，而这些实质性一人公司的存在是不符合中国现行公司法立法目的的。但是，通过对于公司法人的本质以及有限责任制度的经济价值的再认识，我们从法理层面论证了需要在法律上承认一人公司，这也是本文的根本目的。本文以民商法学理论为基础，同时涉及法哲学，法经济学和法制史学等学科领域，采取了法的经济分析方法、运用历史的方法以及比较的方法进行多角度思考，并采用了“柯多――希克斯效率”（Kaldor-Hicks）的标准来评价一项法律制度的效果，以期对公司法理论进行再思考并最终有所突破。全文共六章，约3万字，除了第一章“导论”和第六章“结语”外，本文主干分为四个部分：第二章“一人公司概述”：概括地叙述了一人公司概念、分类，以及产生和世界各国发展之现状，并且提出了一人公司对传统公司社团性理论的挑战，对有限责任制度的挑战以及在事实上已有实质性一人公司的存在的前提下讨论一人公司的必要性的问题。第三章“公司的本质”：“法人实体说”不能合乎逻辑的分析为什么该实体是独立的且具有自然法上的要求获得法律承认其人格的伦理性。法人制度的出现从根本上讲是法律对于社会生活尤其是社会经济生活发展的积极回应，是为保护个人经济自由而创设的法律制度，其目的无非是使个人更方便地参与经济活动，追求和实现自我价值。法人并非事实存在和天然存在的权利义务关系主体，其产生归因于抽象的立法技术，其为民事主体纯粹是基于自然人的社会需要，而进行法律上的拟制，是近现代法技术的杰作。通过分开论证公司在商业交往领域和民事侵权领域所扮演的角色不同，得出公司不单单是“契约的联结”。虽然，从公司的商业角度和历史角度来说，一家组建而成的公司，像其他形式的企业一样，基本上是一系列交易的结合点所在。但是在侵权领域，由于规定了有限责任，受害人将有可能得不到足够的补偿，因此法律等于实质性地介入了权利的分配，这样，我们就很难再简单停留在认为法人是仅仅出于为了法律关系的划一处理而进行法律上的拟制的阶段了，公司更象是法律赋予的任何人可以通过设立公司这种形式而在某种场合可以只负有限的法律责任的媒介。经过分析，我们认为公司是成文法的产物，是基于政策的原因，法律所创设的一种经过一定的法律程序并符合特别的法律（公司法）规定的独立于其成员的拟制的实体。第三章“有限责任制度”：同分析公司法人的本质时所采取的思路一样，从它的商业和历史角度来看，它更象是一个大合同（即公司）中明示的条款，商业交易的债权人将只能从限定的财产中取得补偿。但是从侵权的角度来看，它是法律赋予公司（或者说躲在后面的股东）的一种特权——在发生侵权的时候，他们只以一定的财产补偿受害人。因此，从总体来说，有限责任是法律出于一定的政策目的而赋予公司的权利。有限责任有诸如促进投资、更好地分配企业失败风险、促使所有权和经营权的分离以及增进了市场交易等优点。但是，也有诸如增加股东有用债权人的钱进行赌博的动力、“道德危险因素”有可能膨胀致使股东可能滥用有限责任制度，以及由于有限责任制度的原因侵权受害人有可能得不到足额的赔偿等<WP=5>缺点。但是经过进一步的分析可以知道，问题并不如想象中那么严重，而且从资本主义社会几百年的发展史来看，有限责任制度整体的效果应该是符合“柯多――希克斯效率”的。随后，又概述了公司法人格否认理论以及其本质属性。这种制度是对公司独立人格以及有限责任滥用的有效限制，其根据和标准为是否符合公司独立人格以及有限责任制度的立法目的。第五章“一人公司妥当性论辩”：从历史的角度，我们可以得出社团性并非是公司法人所不可或缺之属性，从政策的角度，去除社团性因素也不无可能，因此，社团性不应该成为一人公司理论上的桎梏。从公司管理的现实情况和其经济上的原因出发，分别对公众持股公司和非公众持股公司进行了分析，指出了在非公众持股公司中，股东密切的参与管理具有其经济上的合理性。同时结合对各国的公司法人格否认理论和司法实践的考察，得出了一人公司并没有对有限责任制度构成根本性的冲击的结论。通过仔细分析实质性一人公司和形式上一人公司分别对经济的影响以后，我们发现，从法律上承认一人公司将会起到避免实质性一人公司带来的无谓的浪费和节省投资者交易费用的效果，因此，这种政策是有效率的。但是我们并不能就此得出该政策应该予以实施，我们还要分析它有可能带来的弊端。经过对单数股东对责任财产的影响，单数股东滥用有限责任制度的实际危害大小以及对侵权受害人的影响的分析，我们认为在有完善的公司法人格否认制度存在的前提下，一人公司带来的弊端并不如想象中那么严重。从而最后得出结论，一人公司在法理的层面上是可行的也是必要的。更多还原

【Abstract】 Middle and small-sized proprietors in china are emerging like bamboo shoots after raining, which play more and more important roles in the whole economy. To avoid conflicting with the multi-shareholder stipulation in Company Law, there are many de facto "one man company"s set up by using nominal shareholders in today’s China. Although one man company is illegal under current Chinese legal system, this thesis is trying to demonstrate the necessity of allowing its existence through analysis of the essence of the company and the rule of limited liability.Based on the civil law and commercial law, this thesis also covers the areas of philosophy, economics, and history. To revalue the company law, many methods are also used, including economic analysis, historical and comparative research, and "Kaldor-Hicks Efficiency" analysis.The thesis consists of six chapters, including Preface (Chapter One ) and Epilogue (Chapter Six), in total 30 thousand words approximately. The main body of the thesis is divided into 4 chapters:Chapter Two "Summary" : This chapter introduces the definition, classification and some facts in some foreign countries. The existence of one man company challenges the traditional concept of "corporation" and rule of limited, and it is time to discuss the necessity of one man company.Chapter Three " Essence of the Company" : The emergence of legal person essentially is the active response of the law to the development of social economic life. It aims to protect people’s freedom in doing business and helps people do business more conveniently. The legal person is not born naturally and it is a masterpiece in the history of modern law, which is invented technically for the urgent need of the society. The company is not only a "nexus of contracts" for its different roles in the area of commercial transaction and torts. Although, from the historical and commercial point of view, a company, just like other types of enterprises, is nexus of a serial of transactions, the victim will not compensate adequately in the cases of torts because of the rule of limited liability. At this point, the company is more like a media permitted by the law to evade the liability. The company is a product of the statute and it is a fictive entity independent of its members, which comes into being after some certain legal processes.Chapter Four "Rule of Limited Liability": Analyzed in the same way as in the Chapter Two, the rule of limited liability is just like an explicit clause in a huge contract (the company). The maximum compensation that the obligee of the commercial transaction<WP=7>can get is the whole company property. In the torts, the company has a privilege gifted by the law, i.e., the company only needs to compensate with its own property. In general, the rule of limited liability is good to encourage transaction, promote investment, and make the separation of ownership and operation. There are also many disadvantage arising from the rule, such as empowering the shareholder to gamble with borrowed money, abuse of rule for the moral hazard factor and inadequate compensation in case of orts. But the situation seems to be not so bad as people imagined. The history of capitalist countries proves that the rule of limited liability accords with the ""Kaldor-Hicks Efficiency". This chapter also introduces the theory of disregarding of corporate personality and its essential characters. The theory is efficient in restraining the abuse of the rule of limited liability.Chapter Five "Argument on Necessity of One Man Company": From the historical point of view, the corporate personality is not an inalienable character of the company, and it also can be abolished technically by the legislation. This chapter analyzes the public company and private company in corporate management and economic aspects, and it points out that it is reasonable for the shareholders to operate totally or mostly by themselves in private companies. Considering the theory of disregarding the corporate personality and更多还原