지정기업 실증분석을 통한 감사인 지정제도 개선방안: IFRS 도입 환경을 중심으로

초록

In order to operate the auditor designation system, which has been maintained for more than two decades since its introduction in 1990, more effectively and enhance efficiency in its implementation, institutional improvement reflecting the recent accounting environment is required. This study aims to examine the overall legal and supervisory problems of the auditor designation system and derive measures to improve it based on the empirical analysis results of companies for which the auditor is designated. To this end, the current status and actual state of the 1,579 companies which auditor was designated from 2000 to 2009 was analyzed from different dimensions. The methods to improve the reasons for auditor designation proposed by this study are as follows. First, the auditor designation for owner-manager companies of a certain size or larger (100 billion won in assets) is reasonable given that the auditor appointment committee is not fulfilling its role. Second, considering the number of back door listing companies among 161 companies delisted from 2000 was as large as 16 (9.94%), it is also reasonable that the auditors of back door listing companies should be designated. Past regulation for designating auditors for companies intending to consolidate with listed companies may be logical grounds for such an improvement to the system. Third, a large number of listed companies are delisted after a short time. This triggers enormous social costs and increases distrust toward the capital market. In the same logic as designating auditors for companies intending to be listed, designating auditors for a certain amount of time after listing a company is necessary for accounting transparency. For the institutional enhancement in the method of designating auditors, designated companies should be classified according to the reasons for designating audit risks as similar and assigned to accounting firms serially in accordance with auditor designation scores. This study also proposes the need to create an institution not to nominate an existing designated auditor in a free acceptance position to an appointment after the designation period lapses. Lastly, enacting and operating designated auditor fees standards according to fair procedures and increasing designated companies’ negotiating edge may be considered as a method of improvement related to designated auditor fees. However, in order to make a reasonable standard for designated auditor fees, a collection of opinions from a broader set of stakeholders, such as companies and auditors, is required. In particular, when there is no reasonable auditing fees standard, contracting parties may be dissatisfied, and a more cautious approach may be necessary. As a lot of existing studies show, the auditor designation system has contributed to improving accounting transparency in Korea without large social costs. Therefore, the measures proposed in this study are expected to develop and improve the current auditor designation system in the midst of a changing accounting environment.

키워드