CAJ | 학술논문

按现行《公司法》的规定，持股数达到法定比例（股份有限公司还须达到一定持股期限）的股东既不必证明召集股东大会的合理性，也不必接受任何机关的监管，只须在董事会、监事会拒绝后即可径行召集股东大会。这样的规定显然太过宽松，可能导致召集权的滥用。此问题有两条解决路径：从解释论的角度，应肯定召集股东对召集理由的说明义务，并可依据《公司法》第20条或《民法通则》第106条追究滥用召集权的股东的责任；从立法论的角度，应赋予法院对召集请求进行审核以及责令申请人提供担保的权力，并赋予董事会和股东对召集行为表示异议的权利。
안현행《공사법》적규정，지고수체도법정비례（고빈유한공사환수체도일정지고기한）적고동기불필증명소집고동대회적합이성，야불필접수임하궤관적감관，지수재동사회、감사회거절후즉가경행소집고동대회。저양적규정현연태과관송，가능도치소집권적람용。차문제유량조해결로경：종해석론적각도，응긍정소집고동대소집이유적설명의무，병가의거《공사법》제20조혹《민법통칙》제106조추구람용소집권적고동적책임；종입법론적각도，응부여법원대소집청구진행심핵이급책령신청인제공담보적권력，병부여동사회화고동대소집행위표시이의적권리。
According to the existing Company Law, the shareholders who hold over 10% of the total shares worth of a company individually or jointly（for the shareholders of incorporated company, they should hold the shares for consecutive ninety days at least）can convene and preside over a meeting of all shareholders even if the board of directors and the board of supervisors have refused the meeting, regardless of whether the reasonableness of the convocation is proved and the meeting is supervised by the authorities concerned. Such regulations are too lenient and may lead to the abuse of convening right. There are two ways to settle the issue. In view of the interpretation of law, the liabilities of explaining the reason should be affirmed to those shareholders who attempt to convene the meeting of shareholders, and those shareholders shall be prosecuted for their liabilities through the Company Law or the General Principles of the Civil Law of the PRC. On the other hand, in view of the legislation, the application for convening the meeting should be examined by the court, and the right to dissent should be given to the board of directors and other shareholders with the power endowed to the court to order the applicant to provide guarantee.