일본의 「책임있는 기관투자가의 제 원칙」 재개정판과 향후 과제에 관한 연구

In 2010, the United Kingdom became the first jurisdiction to adopt a stewardship code, and in 2014, Japan became an early adopter of the UK model by largely transplanting it. In just over a decade since then, more than 20 countries have joined the stewardship code bandwagon. Korea also adopted the Stewardship Code in 2016. Since then, numerous research findings have been published, particularly introducing the stewardship codes of the UK and Japan. However, compared to the abundant introduction of the 2014 and 2017 version of the Japanese Stewardship Code, there has been relatively little introduction of the most recent 2020 revised edition. First, this paper introduces the revision process, background, and main content of the 2020 revised edition. This paper will try to avoid introducing the previous editions, which have already been introduced several times. Second, it summarizes the follow-up work being continued by the Financial Services Agency(FSA) of Japan and the Stewardship Code Expert Council following the revision. Third, this paper examines the future challenges of the stewardship code in Japan. Most of these issues are also relevant for our consideration. In the same year that Japan revised its code, the UK Stewardship Code was also revised after eight years. As stated by the UK Financial Reporting Council(FRC) itself, the code was significantly revised following the recommendations of Sir John Kingsman. The second revision of the UK code has been introduced to our country several times. This paper focuses on the issues related to the revision of Japan’s code. The author became interested in the stewardship code because it seems that insurance companies in our country were excessively passive in adopting this code. According to data from the Financial Services Agency of Japan, as of July 31, 2024, 24 Japanese insurance companies have signed up for the stewardship code. However, over the past eight years, only five Korean insurance companies, most of which are institutional investors, have adopted the stewardship code. This situation is very different from that in Japan. The writer initially wanted to explore the reasons behind this difference and whether activation of the code is necessary and feasible. However, due to the extensive scope of this issue, it will be addressed in a subsequent paper.