我國司法對於公司重整聲請審查之探討

這篇論文係對於我國公司法中重整制度中，聲請人向法院提出公司重整聲請，我國法院對於公司重整聲請審查後所做出之准許裁定與駁回裁定所做之分析。藉由本文對於我國法院所做公司重整聲請裁定之分析，希望可以使讀者了解我國法院關於公司重整聲請之准駁概況，與我國法院如何對公司重整聲請審查與審查後對於准許或駁回所附之理由有基本認識，進一步得知我國法院對於公司重整聲請案件所持之看法與態度。　　規範我國公司重整的法制主要的法規為公司法，公司法建構起我國重整制度，其規定於公司法第五章股份有限公司中第十節公司重整，始於公司法第282條終於公司法第314條共計33條。另外民事訴訟法與非訟事件法有公司重整與非訟事件中程序之相關規定。　　我國法院對於公司重整聲請之審查大致上可以分為兩部分，形式要件審查與實質要件審查。形式要件審查主要規定於公司法第283條之1，由於法院對於形式要件之審查，若該公司重整聲請不符表面上形式要件即裁定駁回，判斷上較為機械式因此相關爭議相對較少，故亦非本文聚焦之處；至於實質要件審查主要規定公司法第285條之1第3項，其中第2款所謂「公司業務及財務狀況無重建更生之可能者」為法院審查後是否准許公司重整之關鍵，亦是本文主要之重點。另外公司法第282條所謂「因財務困難，暫停營業或有停業之虞」，本文認為亦為實質要件，並且有其重要性，故亦為本文另一聚焦之處。　　總體來說，本文主要以「財務困難」與「重建更生之可能」此二實質要件為主軸，對於我國法院對於公司重整聲請中此兩要件所審查之事項、考慮之因素及其所附之理由加以整理並分析，其中本文認為法院之見解有其道理之處加以認同，另外針對本文認為法院審查後所附理由之論述有其疑慮者，本文分析後，提出管見供讀者參考。

關鍵字

公司法；公司重整；重整聲請；法院審查；非訟事件；實質要件；重建更生可能

並列摘要

This paper aims to be an analysis of the company's reorganization system in our country's company law, where the claimant filed a company reorganization petition to the court, and our country’s courts analyzed the approval and rejection rulings made after the review of the company's reorganization petition. Based on the analysis of the company reorganization claims made by our country’s courts, this paper hopes that readers can understand the general situation of the approval of the company reorganization claims by our country’s courts, and how our country’s courts review and approve or reject the company reorganization claims. I have a basic understanding of the attached reasons, and I have further learned about the views and attitudes our country’s courts on the company's reorganization claims. The main legal system regulating the reorganization of our country’s companies is the company law. The company law establishes the reorganization system in our country. There are 33 articles in total in Article 314 of the Company Law. In addition, the Civil Procedure Law and the Non-litigation Event Law have relevant provisions on the company reorganization and non-litigation event procedures. The review of the company's reorganization petition by our country’s courts can be roughly divided into two parts, the formal and substantive requirements. The formal requirements review is mainly stipulated in Article 283-1 of the Company Law. Since the court's review of the formal requirements, if the company's reorganization petition does not meet the formal requirements on the surface, it will be rejected. The judgment is more mechanical and related disputes are relatively few. This is not the focus of this paper; as for the examination of the substantive elements, it mainly stipulates that Article 285-1, Item 3 of the Company Law, among which the second paragraph, “where reconstruction and/or rehabilitation as proposed by the applicant is deemed unfeasible after considering the business and financial conditions of the company” is whether the court will allow the company to rebuild after review. The key to the whole is also the main focus of this paper. In addition, Article 282 of the Company Law says that "where a company which publicly issues shares or corporate bonds suspends its business due to financial difficulty or there is an apprehension of suspension of business thereof" is considered to be a substantive element and important, so it is another focus of this paper. Generally speaking, this paper mainly focuses on the two substantive elements of "financial difficulties" and "possibility of reconstruction and rehabilitation." For the matters reviewed by our country’s courts regarding the company's reorganization petition, the factors considered and the attached reasons are sorted out and analyzed. This paper agrees that the opinions of the court are justified. In addition, this paper considers that the arguments of the reasons attached after the court review have doubts. After analysis, this paper puts forward some opinions for readers' reference.