공적감리와 자율감리의 신뢰성

초록

Accounting enforcement and audit review in Korea have been delegated for quite a long time. However, the efficacy of delegation has not been yet evaluated. Thus this paper intends to provide empirical evidence about objectivity and credibility of delegation by analyzing audit reviews performed and consequent sanctions imposed by two delegates, Financial Supervisory Service(FSS) and Korea Institute of Certified Public Accounts(KICPA). Examination of audit reviews of 2001 through 2004 years performed by abovementioned two delegates reveals that compared to FSS, KICPA reports much fewer violations and imposes relatively generous sanctions on auditors with malpractice. Investigation of penalties imposed on auditors with malpractice finds that KICPA assesses lower penalties than does FSS. These generous penalties imposed by KICPA are consistent across all the types of auditors; Global Big5 affiliated auditors and not affiliated auditors. Further, while FSS imposes equitable penalties on auditors with malpractice regardless of their affiliation with Big5, KICPA appears to differentiate in favor of Big5 affiliated auditors from those without the affiliation. These results imply that objectivity and credibility of audit reviews performed and consequent sanctions imposed by KICPA should be in substantial doubt.

키워드