Auditor - Thinking

Japanese: 監査役 - かんさやく

An organization that audits the performance of duties by directors (and accounting advisors) and prepares audit reports. In principle, it has the authority to audit operations and accounts.

[Norihiko Fukuhara December 12, 2017]

significance

The 1950 Commercial Code amendments made it mandatory for Japanese corporations to have a board of directors and auditors, and since then, in order to prevent scandals and ensure proper business execution, a series of legal amendments have been made, primarily to the auditor system. In particular, the amendments to the Commercial Code (Companies Act) during the Heisei period made organizational design more flexible and strengthened the supervisory function of the board of directors, providing a variety of mechanisms for the auditing of corporations.

Under the current Companies Act, a stock company that has an auditor (except for those whose articles of incorporation stipulate that the scope of the auditor's audit is limited to accounting matters) or that is required to have an auditor under the Companies Act is called a "company with auditors" (Article 2, item 9 of the Companies Act. All article numbers below refer to the Companies Act). Except for companies with a board of auditors and companies with accounting auditors, stock companies that are not public companies (private companies = companies with all stock transfer restrictions) can stipulate in their articles of incorporation that the authority of the auditors is limited to accounting audits (Article 389), and a company that has such a stipulation does not fall under the category of a "company with auditors" under the Companies Act (Article 2, item 9), even if it has auditors.

In companies that do not have auditors or audit committee members with the authority to audit operations, shareholders' supervisory authority is strengthened in the following ways:

(1) No court permission is required to inspect the minutes of board meetings (Article 371, Paragraph 2).
(2) Requests for, convening, attending and expressing opinions at board meetings (Article 367, Paragraphs 1, 3 and 4)
(3) Exclusion of exemption from liability for directors (board of directors) under the articles of incorporation (Article 426, Paragraph 1),
(4) Directors’ reporting obligations (Article 357)
(5) Relaxation of requirements for seeking an injunction against directors’ illegal conduct (Article 360).

A joint stock company may appoint an auditor or a board of auditors by stipulation in its articles of incorporation (Article 326, Paragraph 2), but a company with an accounting auditor must appoint an auditor, and a company with a board of directors must appoint an auditor as a general rule. However, even if the company has a board of directors, a private company (excluding a company with an accounting auditor or a board of auditors) may choose not to appoint an auditor by appointing an accounting advisor. A company with a nomination committee, etc. cannot appoint an auditor (Article 327, Paragraphs 2-4). If an accounting auditor is appointed, the auditor is expected to receive reports from the accounting auditor (Article 397), be involved in the selection and remuneration of the accounting auditor (Articles 340, 344, 399), and work in cooperation with the accounting auditor to execute his/her duties (Article 327, Paragraph 3, Article 389, Paragraph 1).

[Norihiko Fukuhara December 12, 2017]

authority

In principle, auditors have the authority to audit the performance of duties by directors (and accounting advisors), and this authority extends to auditing the company's overall operations, including accounting audits (Article 381, Paragraph 1). The scope of their audit authority is limited to auditing the legality of business execution, and does not extend to auditing the appropriateness of the board of directors (majority opinion). However, business execution that is deemed to be improper may be subject to an audit as "grossly improper" (Article 382).

In order to perform their duties, Audit & Supervisory Board Members shall have the following various powers:

(1) The right to collect business reports from directors, accounting advisors, managers and other employees and the right to investigate the business and financial status (Article 381, Paragraph 2),
(2) The right to collect business reports from subsidiaries and the right to investigate the status of their business assets (Article 381, Paragraph 3),
(3) Attending and expressing opinions at board meetings (Article 383, paragraph 1, main text),
(4) The obligation to report to the directors (board of directors) when a director commits an illegal act (Article 382) and the right to request and convene a board of directors meeting (Article 383, Paragraphs 2 and 3),
(5) Obligation to investigate and report opinions on documents submitted to shareholders’ meetings (Article 384)
(6) The right to seek injunctions against directors for illegal acts (Article 385);
(7) The right of representation in litigation between the company and its directors (Article 386);
(8) Right to file various lawsuits (Articles 828 and 831)
(9) Right to file a petition to commence various procedures (Articles 511 and 522).

Regarding attendance at board meetings by special directors (Article 373), the auditors who will attend may be selected by mutual election among themselves (Article 383, Paragraph 1, proviso).

[Norihiko Fukuhara December 12, 2017]

Appointment/termination

Qualifications and prohibition of holding multiple positions

Like directors, auditors are limited to natural persons, certain disqualifications are stipulated by law, and in the case of public companies, there are restrictions on qualifications in the articles of incorporation (Article 335, paragraph 1, Article 331, paragraphs 1 and 2). Auditors cannot serve as directors, executive officers, managers, or other employees of a stock company or its subsidiaries (Article 335, paragraph 2), and cannot serve as accounting advisors of a stock company or its subsidiaries (Article 333, paragraphs 2 and 3, item 1, Article 335, paragraph 2).

There is a precedent that has determined that an auditor who is also a qualified attorney-at-law and serves as the company's litigation representative in certain litigation cases does not violate the prohibition on auditors holding multiple positions (Article 276 of the Commercial Code before the 2005 amendment).

[Norihiko Fukuhara December 12, 2017]

Appointment

The appointment of the incorporation auditor is the same as the appointment of the incorporation director. Also, like the appointment of directors, in principle, the auditor is appointed by a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders (Article 329, Paragraph 1), and in companies with restricted stock transfer, the auditor can be appointed at a general meeting of class shareholders according to the provisions of the articles of incorporation (Article 108, Paragraphs 1, Item 9 and 2, Item 9, Article 347, Paragraph 2). However, there is no system of cumulative voting allowed for the appointment of directors.

When appointing auditors, auditors may express their opinions at the general shareholders' meeting (Article 345, Paragraphs 4 and 1). Furthermore, when a proposal for the appointment of auditors is submitted to the general shareholders' meeting, the consent of a majority of auditors (the board of auditors) is required, and conversely, auditors (the board of auditors) are also permitted to submit proposals for the appointment of auditors to directors (Article 343, Paragraphs 1 and 3). The status of auditors is strengthened by their right to consent to these proposals and to propose proposals for the appointment of auditors. Furthermore, if the appointment of auditors, their names, and authority are limited to accounting audits, this is to be registered (Article 911, Paragraph 3).

[Norihiko Fukuhara December 12, 2017]

Term of office/termination

The term of office of an auditor is until the conclusion of the ordinary general meeting of shareholders for the last business year ending within four years after the appointment (Article 336, Paragraph 1), and in a private company, the term of office may be extended by the articles of incorporation to the conclusion of the ordinary general meeting of shareholders for the last business year ending within ten years after the appointment (Article 336, Paragraph 2). In addition, the articles of incorporation may limit the term of office of an auditor appointed to replace an auditor who retired before the expiration of his/her term of office to the expiration of the term of the retired auditor, and shorten the term of office of a substitute auditor to the expiration of the remaining term of office of the retired auditor (Article 336, Paragraph 3).

Notwithstanding the above, in the event that any of the following amendments to the Articles of Incorporation are made, the term of office of the Audit & Supervisory Board Members shall expire when such amendments to the Articles of Incorporation come into effect.

(1) Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation to abolish the provision on the appointment of auditors;
(2) Amending the articles of incorporation to establish a committee;
(3) Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation to abolish the provision limiting the scope of audits by auditors to accounting matters;
(4) Amendment to the articles of incorporation to abolish the provision in the articles of incorporation stating that the company is a company with restricted stock transfer (Article 4 of the same Act).

In addition, the grounds for termination of office due to the termination of the mandate contract are the same as for directors. In principle, auditors may be dismissed at any time by special resolution of the general shareholders' meeting (Articles 339 and 309, Paragraph 2, Item 7). The appointment of substitute auditors, etc. is the same as for substitute directors (Article 329, Paragraph 3). Auditors may express their opinions regarding dismissal or resignation at the general shareholders' meeting (Article 345, Paragraphs 1 and 4).

[Norihiko Fukuhara December 12, 2017]

Duties and Remuneration

The relationship between the company and its auditors is governed by the provisions regarding delegation, and auditors have a duty of care toward the company when performing their duties. However, unlike directors, auditors are not involved in the execution of the company's business, and therefore do not have a duty of loyalty, nor are they subject to non-competition obligations or prior restrictions on conflict-of-interest transactions.

The remuneration of auditors is determined separately from that of directors by the articles of incorporation or a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders (Article 387). If there are two or more auditors, and the remuneration of each auditor is not determined by the articles of incorporation or a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders, it shall be determined by consultation among the auditors within the scope of the articles of incorporation or the resolution of the general meeting (Article 387, Paragraph 2). Auditors may also express their opinions regarding the remuneration of auditors at the general meeting of shareholders (Article 388, Paragraph 3). In addition, there are special provisions regarding expenses related to the performance of duties (Article 388). These are intended to ensure the independence of the auditors' position and the fairness of the performance of their duties.

[Norihiko Fukuhara December 12, 2017]

responsibility

Auditors are liable to the company for dereliction of duty (Article 423, Paragraph 1), and are liable to third parties if they act with malice or gross negligence in the performance of their duties (Article 429). Similar to outside directors, they may be partially exempted from liability to the company by resolution of the general shareholders' meeting or consent of a majority of directors pursuant to the provisions of the articles of incorporation (resolution of the board of directors) (Articles 425 and 426), and outside auditors may also be permitted to enter into contracts limiting their liability (Article 427). The liability of auditors is subject to shareholder derivative actions (Article 847).

[Norihiko Fukuhara December 12, 2017]

"Company Law, 2nd revised edition (2015, Gakuyo Shobo) by Kyoichi Toriyama, Norihiko Fukuhara, Kimihito Amari, Tamesaburo Yamamoto, and Chihiro Nui" ▽ "Corporate Law, 6th edition (2015, Yuhikaku) by Kenjiro Egashira" ▽ "Legal Studies Lecture Series: Company Law, 19th edition (2017, Kobundo) by Hideki Kanda" ▽ "Outline of Corporate Law 3: Corporate Organization Law - Company Law, etc. by Norihiko Fukuhara (2017, Bunshindo)"

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

Japanese:

取締役（および会計参与）の職務執行を監査し、監査報告を作成する機関。原則として、業務監査および会計監査の権限を有する。

［福原紀彦　2017年12月12日］

意義

1950年（昭和25）改正商法により、日本の株式会社では取締役会と監査役が必置機関とされ、以後、不祥事を防止して業務執行の適正を確保するために、監査役制度を中心に法改正が重ねられてきた。とりわけ平成期の商法（会社法）改正では、機関設計の柔軟化と取締役会の監督機能強化により、株式会社の監査にも多様な仕組みが用意されている。

　現行会社法上、監査役を置く株式会社（その監査役の監査の範囲を会計に関するものに限定する旨の定款の定めがあるものを除く）または会社法により監査役を置かなければならない株式会社を「監査役設置会社」という（会社法2条9号。以下の条文番号はすべて会社法をさす）。監査役会設置会社および会計監査人設置会社を除き、公開会社でない株式会社（非公開会社＝全部株式譲渡制限会社）では、監査役の権限を、会計監査に限定する旨を定款で定めることができ（389条）、このような定めを置いた会社は、監査役を置いていたとしても、会社法上の「監査役設置会社」には該当しない（2条9号）。

　業務監査権限を有する監査役または監査委員を置いていない会社では、次のような点で株主の監督権限が強化されている。

(1)取締役会の議事録閲覧につき裁判所の許可不要（371条2項）、
(2)取締役会の招集請求・招集・出席と意見陳述（367条1項・3項・4項）、
(3)定款規定による取締役（取締役会）による責任の免除の排除（426条1項）、
(4)取締役の報告義務（357条）、
(5)取締役の違法行為差止請求権の要件緩和（360条）。

　株式会社は、定款の定めによって、監査役または監査役会を置くことができるとされるが（326条2項）、会計監査人設置会社は監査役を置かなければならず、また、取締役会設置会社では原則として監査役を置く必要がある。しかし、取締役会設置会社であっても非公開会社（会計監査人設置会社または監査役会設置会社を除く）では、会計参与を設置することにより監査役を設けないことも認められる。指名委員会等設置会社では、監査役を置くことはできない（327条2～4項）。会計監査人が設置されている場合には、監査役は、会計監査人から報告を受け（397条）、会計監査人の選任・報酬の決定などに関与し（340条、344条、399条）、会計監査人と連携して職務を執行することが予定されている（327条3項、389条1項）。

［福原紀彦　2017年12月12日］

権限

監査役は、原則として、取締役（および会計参与）の職務執行を監査する権限を有し、その権限は、会計監査を含む会社の業務全般の監査に及ぶ（381条1項）。その業務監査権限の範囲は、業務執行の適法性監査に限定され、取締役会のもつ妥当性監査にまでは及ばない（多数説）。ただし、不当と認められる業務執行に対しては、「著しく不当」として監査の対象となり得る（382条）。

　監査役はその職務を執行するため、次のような種々の権限を有する。

(1)取締役・会計参与・支配人その他の使用人に対する事業報告徴収権および業務財産状況調査権（381条2項）、
(2)子会社に対する事業報告徴収権および業務財産状況調査権（381条3項）、
(3)取締役会への出席・意見陳述（383条1項本文）、
(4)取締役に違法行為がある場合の取締役（取締役会）への報告義務（382条）と取締役会招集請求権・招集権（383条2項・3項）、
(5)株主総会提出書類の調査・意見報告義務（384条）、
(6)取締役の違法行為差止請求権（385条）、
(7)会社と取締役間の訴訟における会社代表権（386条）、
(8)各種訴訟提起権（828条、831条）、
(9)各種手続開始申立権（511条、522条）。

　特別取締役による取締役会（373条）の出席については、監査役の互選によって出席する監査役を定めてもよい（383条1項但書）。

［福原紀彦　2017年12月12日］

選任・終任

資格・兼任禁止

監査役は、取締役と同様、自然人に限られ、一定の欠格事由が法定され、また、公開会社では定款による資格限定に制限がある（335条1項、331条1項・2項）。監査役は、株式会社・その子会社の取締役・執行役・支配人その他の使用人を兼務することができず（335条2項）、また、株式会社・その子会社の会計参与を兼務することができない（333条2項・3項1号、335条2項）。

　弁護士資格を有する監査役が特定の訴訟事件につき会社の訴訟代理人になることは監査役の兼任禁止規定（2005年改正前商法276条）に反しないとした判例がある。

［福原紀彦　2017年12月12日］

選任

設立時監査役の選任は、設立時取締役の選任と同様である。また、取締役の選任と同様に、監査役は、原則として、株主総会の決議によって選任され（329条1項）、株式譲渡制限会社では定款の定めにより種類株主の総会で選任できる（108条1項9号・2項9号、347条2項）。もっとも、取締役選任の際に認められる累積投票の制度はない。

　監査役は、選任にあたり、株主総会で意見を述べることができる（345条4項・1項）。さらに、監査役の選任に関する議案が株主総会に提出される際には、監査役の過半数（監査役会）の同意が必要とされ、逆に監査役（監査役会）のほうから取締役に対して監査役選任議案の提出も認められている（343条1項・3項）。これらの選任議案への同意権や選任議題議案提案権等により、監査役の地位が強化されている。なお、監査役を置く旨と監査役の氏名、権限を会計監査に限定する場合には、その旨は登記事項である（911条3項）。

［福原紀彦　2017年12月12日］

任期・終任

監査役の任期は、選任後4年以内に終了する事業年度のうち最終のものに関する定時株主総会の終結のときまでであり（336条1項）、非公開会社では、定款によって、その任期を選任後10年以内に終了する事業年度のうち最終のものに関する定時株主総会の終結のときまで伸長することができる（同条2項）。また、定款により、任期の満了前に退任した監査役の補欠として選任された監査役の任期を、退任した監査役の任期の満了するときまでとして、補欠監査役の任期を退任監査役の残任期間満了まで短縮することができる（同条3項）。

　以上にかかわらず、次に掲げる定款の変更をした場合には、監査役の任期は、当該定款の変更の効力が生じたときに満了する。

(1)監査役を置く旨の定款の定めを廃止する定款変更、
(2)委員会を置く旨の定款変更、
(3)監査役の監査の範囲を会計に関するものに限定する旨の定款の定めを廃止する定款変更、
(4)株式譲渡制限会社である旨の定款の定めを廃止する定款変更（同条4項）。

　このほか、委任契約の終了に伴う終任事由については、取締役と同様である。原則として、株主総会の特別決議によりいつでも監査役を解任できる（339条、309条2項7号）。補欠監査役等の選任については、補欠取締役と同様である（329条3項）。監査役は、解任・辞任につき、株主総会で意見を述べることができる（345条1項・4項）。

［福原紀彦　2017年12月12日］

義務・報酬

会社と監査役との関係は、委任に関する規定に従うので、監査役は、その職務を行うにあたって、会社に対して善管注意義務を負う。ただし、監査役は、取締役と異なり、会社の業務執行にあたらないので、忠実義務を負わず、競業避止義務や利益相反取引の事前規制には服さない。

　監査役の報酬等については、定款または株主総会の決議で、取締役の報酬等とは別に定められる（387条）。監査役が2人以上いる場合、各監査役の報酬等について、定款・株主総会の決議で定められていなければ、定款・総会決議の範囲内で、監査役の協議によって定める（同条2項）。監査役は、株主総会において、監査役の報酬等について意見を述べることもできる（同条3項）。また、職務執行に関する費用につき、特別の規定が置かれている（388条）。これらは、監査役の地位の独立性と職務執行の公正を確保するためである。

［福原紀彦　2017年12月12日］

責任

監査役は、任務懈怠(けたい)により会社に対して責任を負い（423条1項）、職務の執行につき悪意または重過失があれば、第三者に対しても責任を負う（429条）。社外取締役に準じて、株主総会の決議または定款規定による取締役の過半数の同意（取締役会の決議）により、会社に対する責任の一部免除が認められ（425条、426条）、社外監査役については、責任限定契約も認められる（427条）。監査役の責任は、株主代表訴訟の対象になる（847条）。

［福原紀彦　2017年12月12日］

『鳥山恭一・福原紀彦・甘利公人・山本爲三郎・布井千博著『会社法』第2次改訂版（2015・学陽書房）』▽『江頭憲治郎著『株式会社法』第6版（2015・有斐閣）』▽『神田秀樹著『法律学講座双書　会社法』第19版（2017・弘文堂）』▽『福原紀彦著『企業法要綱3　企業組織法――会社法等』（2017・文眞堂）』