미흡한 전문가적 의구심으로 발생한 고의적 회계부정에 대한 감사실패의 사례연구

This is a case study of audit failures caused by insufficient professional skepticism. In other words, this study emphasizes the importance of professional skepticism on the basis of actual cases of audit failure which performing accounting fraud is not uncovered by the audit procedures of auditors. Case company, chosen by regulators as intensive supervision after sample supervisory target, is investigated to perform collectively accounting frauds. First, auditor had not caught the ‘false reversals of loan loss reserves’ and ‘fraudulent sales’ made for the purpose of escaping the delisting because of failing to maintain appropriate professional skepticism. Second, it was not found an frauds of current asset because communication was less made between team members about what was found during the auditing. Third, the items described in the audit working paper were missed in audit report because the appropriate audit quality control review was not well done. The auditor should consider the following issues in the risk assessment process. First, the frequent replacement of the management and governance structure could impair the effective monitoring of the financial reporting process and internal controls. This can serve as a factor that increases the inherent risks in the financial statement level, the auditor should consider them when assessing material misstatement risks. Second, the auditors should understand the business risks that may effect the objectives and strategies of company, and material misstatement risk of the financial statements. The expanding into new business areas with little or no experience may occur new control risks as well as inherent risks. Therefore, auditors should establish an appropriate audit plan for responding to potential misstatement risks in this regard. Third, the reduction of profit margins and fierce competition, increase the misstatement risks and fraudulent financial reporting to escape the delisting generates a motivation or pressure of misstatement. Therefore, auditors should establish an audit procedure that can effectively find a misstatement by identifying risks of companies. Fourth, insufficient internal control of the company increases control risks. Thus auditors should establish an audit strategy that relies on substantial procedures of the account balance via testing of transactions It can be expected that case company has the material misstatement risks in the level of financial statements as well as management assertion level. Therefore, the following response is required depending on the ISA 330 in order to cope with such risks. First, It is needs to change the nature of audit procedures to obtain convincing audit evidences to respond to the level in risks of financial statements. In other words, audit team should maintain professional skepticism and a appropriate allocation of human resources with experience, strengthening of the oversight activities are needed. In addition, expanded audit evidences should be obtained through substantial procedures rather than testing internal control if the control environment is not effective. Second, auditors should get a more reliable audit evidences to deal with risks of management assertion level. Namely, auditors get corroboration from a number of independent sources, such as checking for completeness of contract terms to the other party of the contract. In addition, performing the substantial procedure at the end of the reporting period, unannounced or unpredictable times is required. Auditors should establish an audit plan and perform the audit work with the higher level of professional skepticism than usual at the situation in the higher distortion of the financial statements (e.g. delisting of firms, ect.) This level of professional skepticism has an important influence in determining the scope of the audit evidence, the nature and reliability.