미국 신용평가회사개혁법의 제정과 우리법상 입법정책적 시사점

Since 1975 the SEC decided to create a wholly new regulatory category: “nationally recognized statistical rating organizations” (NRSROs). Only the NRSROs’ ratings would be valid for the determination of the broker-dealers’ capital requirements.In the wake of the Enron bankruptcy and other corporate scandals, the SEC’s NRSRO designation system (and its opaqueness) received attention, as did the potential for conflicts of interest in the issuer-pay model, since a bond rating firm might threaten an issuer with a poor rating unless the latter paid the rater a sufficient fee or agreed to purchase other (e.g., consulting) services from the rater.However as President Bush signed the Credit Rating Agency Reform Act of 2006, it made an end of the SEC’s haphazard regulation of this industry over the past 31 years. And the reform could well be as important for the development of U.S. capital markets as any likely reform of Sarbanes-Oxley.There are three major rating firms in Korea. Rating firms should strictly comply with the Use and Protection of Credit Information Act(hereafter the Act), also rating Agency is supervised by the act. The act already used registration system. However there differ from requirement of decision criterion. The reform act depends on market test but the Act is not. It ignorant market faith about credit rating. This paper analyze major issues of the reform act; the legislation substitutes for the SEC’s opaque NRSRO designation system a relatively transparent and open registration system, and tries to avoid specifying any particular business model, etc., and then suggests some legal suggestions.