本文選題：盈余分配 + 利潤(rùn)分配請(qǐng)求權(quán)　； 參考：《中國(guó)政法大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：股東享有收益權(quán),向股東分配利潤(rùn)是公司之義務(wù)。公司的利潤(rùn)分配行為不僅關(guān)涉股東、公司的利益,還與公司的管理層、勞動(dòng)者、債權(quán)人及國(guó)家稅收息息相關(guān)。利潤(rùn)分配以尊重公司自治為原則,但在意思自治被濫用時(shí),司法可以介入公司內(nèi)部的法律關(guān)系。由此,司法實(shí)踐中積累了大量與利潤(rùn)分配相關(guān)的案例。本文主要采用案例分析和實(shí)證研究的方法,對(duì)“中國(guó)裁判文書網(wǎng)”公示的“公司盈余分配糾紛”案例進(jìn)行收集、整理、歸納、總結(jié),以期能夠觀察到利潤(rùn)分配規(guī)范適用的現(xiàn)實(shí)背景、適用情況、存在的問題及實(shí)踐中的解決方式。對(duì)盈余分配訴訟中的一些共性問題,各地高院有出臺(tái)“審判指導(dǎo)意見”,本文也對(duì)該部分內(nèi)容進(jìn)行了收集和整理。本文第一章主要圍繞盈余分配訴訟中的股東及相關(guān)主體展開。首先對(duì)于訴訟中反映的股東身份認(rèn)定問題進(jìn)行分析。進(jìn)而,總結(jié)與特殊身份相關(guān)的案例,包括股權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓后轉(zhuǎn)讓方主張股利、隱名股東主張股利、持股職工主張股利、股權(quán)激勵(lì)對(duì)象主張股利四種情形,分別研析其中存在的問題及法院的應(yīng)對(duì)情況。第二章內(nèi)容主要探討盈余分配訴訟中如何確定公司的可分配利潤(rùn)。利潤(rùn)核算的法定依據(jù)來源于經(jīng)審計(jì)財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)報(bào)告中的“凈利潤(rùn)”或“未分配利潤(rùn)”項(xiàng)目。一些案例也涉及非現(xiàn)金利潤(rùn)、分公司利潤(rùn)、特定收益等特殊形式利潤(rùn)的分配。除審計(jì)報(bào)告以外,公司內(nèi)部財(cái)務(wù)文件、工商納稅申報(bào)文件、股東會(huì)決議有著不同的證明效力。進(jìn)而,訴訟中的舉證責(zé)任分配規(guī)則影響著法院對(duì)利潤(rùn)的確定。司法鑒定對(duì)確定利潤(rùn)有重要價(jià)值,但也有其局限。第三章內(nèi)容主要探討盈余分配訴訟中有股東會(huì)分紅決議時(shí),股東會(huì)決議效力的判斷問題。股東會(huì)決議與章程不一致時(shí)并不必然無效。決議分配的股利數(shù)額多于公司可分配利潤(rùn)、或未提取公積金時(shí),法院對(duì)決議效力有不同的認(rèn)識(shí)。另外,股東會(huì)決議不分紅時(shí),法院會(huì)優(yōu)先尊重公司的商業(yè)判斷。而決議排除個(gè)別股東分紅,則要求當(dāng)事人股東同意,方對(duì)其有效。第四章內(nèi)容主要探討盈余分配訴訟中沒有股東會(huì)分紅決議的情況。原告股東沒有提交決議,法院原則上會(huì)駁回。而能否依照章程規(guī)定的分紅安排進(jìn)行分配,存有爭(zhēng)議。公司承諾分紅或已向部分股東分紅時(shí),法院往往考慮的是尊重意思自治和維護(hù)股權(quán)平等,但此時(shí)是否還需考察公司的利潤(rùn)情況,法院的做法不同。其他股東濫用權(quán)利或董事、高管欺詐行為導(dǎo)致不分配利潤(rùn)的案例非常有限,文中對(duì)此類案件的難點(diǎn)問題進(jìn)行了總結(jié)和分析。第五章內(nèi)容主要探討盈余分配訴訟中股東間分紅比例的確認(rèn)和股利支付問題。股東間分紅比例的確認(rèn)涉及實(shí)繳出資額的認(rèn)定、特殊約定的形式、固定收益率或收益額約定的效力問題。股利支付環(huán)節(jié),則涉及個(gè)人所得稅的扣除、遲延支付的利息計(jì)算和抵銷問題。
[Abstract]:Shareholders enjoy the right to profit, and it is the duty of the company to distribute profits to shareholders. The company's profit distribution is not only related to the interests of shareholders and companies, but also closely related to the management, workers, creditors and state taxes. The principle of profit distribution is to respect the autonomy of the company, but when the autonomy of will is abused, the judiciary can intervene in the legal relationship within the company. As a result, a large number of cases related to profit distribution have been accumulated in judicial practice. This paper mainly adopts the method of case analysis and empirical research to collect, sort out, summarize and summarize the cases of "Company earnings Distribution disputes", which are published by China referee document Network. The purpose of this paper is to observe the practical background, the applicable situation, the existing problems and the practical solutions of the application of profit distribution norms. There are some common problems in surplus distribution litigation, and the judicial guidance opinion has been issued by various high courts. This paper also collects and arranges the contents of this part. The first chapter focuses on shareholders and related subjects in earnings distribution litigation. First of all, it analyzes the problem of shareholder identification reflected in litigation. Then, it summarizes the cases related to special identity, including four cases: the transferor claims the dividend, the dormant shareholder claims the dividend, the employee claims the dividend, and the object of the equity incentive advocates the dividend. Analyze the existing problems and the court's response respectively. The second chapter mainly discusses how to determine the distributable profits in earnings distribution litigation. The legal basis of profit accounting comes from the item of "net profit" or "undistributed profit" in audited financial accounting report. Some cases also involve the distribution of special forms of profit, such as non-cash profits, branch profits, specific returns, etc. In addition to the audit report, the company's internal financial documents, industrial and commercial tax return documents, shareholders' meeting resolutions have different certification effect. Furthermore, the rules of distribution of burden of proof influence the court's determination of profit. Forensic expertise has important value in determining profits, but it also has its limitations. The third chapter mainly discusses the judgment of the validity of shareholders' meeting resolution when there is dividend resolution in surplus distribution litigation. Decisions of shareholders' meetings are not necessarily invalid when they are inconsistent with the articles of association. The court has different views on the validity of the resolution if the dividend amount is more than the company's distributable profit, or if the provident fund is not withdrawn. In addition, shareholders will decide not to pay dividends, the court will first respect the company's business judgment. And resolution excludes individual stockholder to share out bonus, ask party shareholder agrees, ability to be effective to it. The fourth chapter mainly discusses the situation that there is no dividend resolution in earnings distribution litigation. If the plaintiff shareholder fails to file a resolution, the court will reject it in principle. And can according to the regulation of the distribution of dividend arrangements, there is controversy. When the company promises to pay dividends or has already paid dividends to some shareholders, the court often considers respecting autonomy of will and safeguarding equity equality, but whether or not the profits of the company should be examined at this time, the court's practice is different. The cases of other shareholders abusing their rights or directors and executives' fraud lead to no distribution of profits are very limited. This paper summarizes and analyzes the difficult problems of this kind of cases. The fifth chapter mainly discusses the confirmation of dividend ratio and dividend payment in earnings distribution litigation. The confirmation of the proportion of dividends between shareholders involves the determination of the amount of paid-in capital, the form of special agreement, the validity of the fixed rate of return or the agreement on the amount of income. Dividend payment involves individual income tax deduction, late payment of interest calculation and offset.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.91

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 王艷梅;張yN芮;;我國(guó)有限責(zé)任公司盈余分配訴訟實(shí)證研究[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)戰(zhàn)線;2014年03期

2 ;《中華人民共和國(guó)農(nóng)民專業(yè)合作社法》問答(五)[J];山西農(nóng)業(yè)(致富科技);2007年09期

3 候天友西南政法大學(xué),張鵬飛;簡(jiǎn)談?dòng)⒚婪ㄏ祰?guó)家公司法對(duì)盈余分配決定權(quán)的規(guī)定[J];廣西政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1999年03期

4 婁勇;“干部+農(nóng)戶”扶貧有出路[J];中國(guó)民政;1995年12期

5 戴芳;合伙人出資:盈余分配及債務(wù)負(fù)擔(dān)[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)改革;1998年05期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前9條

1 本報(bào)記者 李永生 陳濤;“盈余分配表”的秘密[N];農(nóng)民日?qǐng)?bào);2013年

2 ;《農(nóng)民專業(yè)合作社法》知識(shí)問答（三）[N];人民日?qǐng)?bào);2007年

3 本報(bào)記者 劉福仁;建設(shè)農(nóng)民合作社應(yīng)避免走進(jìn)誤區(qū)[N];吉林農(nóng)村報(bào);2010年

4 本報(bào)記者 毛慶　本報(bào)通訊員 工萱;激辯1小時(shí) 社員盈余分配比例翻番[N];南京日?qǐng)?bào);2011年

5 北京市第二中級(jí)人民法院法官 顧國(guó)增;中外合資企業(yè)盈余分配的警鐘[N];國(guó)際商報(bào);2004年

6 朱慶海;公民股東退股后仍享有知情權(quán)嗎？[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2005年

7 ;合作社如何實(shí)行特殊的盈余分配制度?[N];東方城鄉(xiāng)報(bào);2009年

8 記者 張紅;天天有活干 月月有錢賺 年年有發(fā)展[N];東方煙草報(bào);2012年

9 本報(bào)記者 鄧靜 本報(bào)通訊員 張洪雨 任淑娟;“要想有利潤(rùn)，先讓農(nóng)戶賺到錢”[N];德州日?qǐng)?bào);2014年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 李潔琦;有限責(zé)任公司盈余分配訴訟實(shí)例分析[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2017年

2 包如源;股東盈余分配權(quán)的司法救濟(jì)與立法完善[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué);2009年

3 王千惠;論有限責(zé)任公司盈余分配爭(zhēng)議的司法介入[D];華東政法大學(xué);2016年

4 張君;有限公司股東盈余分配權(quán)的司法保護(hù)問題研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2016年

5 葛瑩;論非基于公司決議的盈余分配請(qǐng)求權(quán)的司法保護(hù)[D];延邊大學(xué);2016年

6 張麗月;股東強(qiáng)制盈余分配請(qǐng)求權(quán)法律問題研究[D];河北大學(xué);2016年

7 王少威;蔡某訴成都振中公司盈余分配糾紛案評(píng)析[D];湖南大學(xué);2015年

8 沈伯迪;論股東強(qiáng)制盈余分配請(qǐng)求權(quán)的司法介入[D];浙江大學(xué);2017年

9 黃瑛;有限責(zé)任公司股東盈余分配請(qǐng)求權(quán)研究[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué);2017年

10 李洋洋;股東盈余分配請(qǐng)求權(quán)的司法保護(hù)研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2016年

，

本文編號(hào)：2085879