LOG IN창 닫기

  • 회원님의 아이디와 패스워드를 입력해 주세요.
  • 회원이 아니시면 아래 [회원가입]을 눌러 회원가입을 해주시기 바랍니다.

아이디 저장


아이디 중복검사창 닫기

사용 가능한 회원 아이디 입니다.

E-mail 중복확인창 닫기

사용 가능한 E-mail 주소 입니다.

우편번호 검색창 닫기



비밀번호 찾기




학술자료 검색

한국 상장기업의 성장기회와 자본구조 선택에 관한 실증연구

  • 오세경 건국대학교 경영대학 교수
  • 김우성 건국대학교 경영대학 강사
본 연구는 2000년부터 2010년까지 한국 유가증권상장기업과 코스닥 상장기업을 대 상으로 성장기회가 자본구조 선택에 미치는 영향을 분석하고, 국내 상장기업의 경우 어떤 자본구조이론이 잘 부합되는지를 밝히고자 하였다. 본 연구는 첫째, 시장가 대 장부가비율이 장부가부채비율과 유의한 정(+)의 관계를 보이나, 시장가부채비율과는 유의한 부(-)의 관계를 보이고 있음을 발견하였다. 이는 성장기회와 장부가부채비율 간에는 자본조달순서이론이, 성장기회와 시장가부채비율 간에는 상충이론과 복합자 본조달순서이론이 잘 부합됨을 보이는 것이다. 둘째, 성장기회를 세 그룹으로 나누어 분석한 결과 선행연구와 달리 회귀계수의 부호는 모두 일치하였으나, 그룹별로 다른 민감도를 보였다. 셋째, 자금부족분 변수를 통해 자본조달순서이론을 검정한 결과는 부합하지 않으나 마켓타이밍이론을 검정한 결과는 시장가부채비율의 경우에만 부합 하는 것으로 나타났다. 마지막으로 성장기회와 은행차입금 간에는 유의한 부(-)의 관계가 있음을 보았는데, 이는 고성장기회기업이 자신의 정보가 은행에 독점화되고 지배될 것을 우려하는 홀드업(hold-up) 문제에 기인하는 것으로 보인다.
성장기회; 자본구조 선택; 시장가 대 장부가 비율; 레버리지; 은행차입금; Growth Opportunity; Book Leverage; Market Leverage; Capital Structure Theory; Bank Loan

Growth Opportunity and Capital Structure of Korean Listed Manufacturing Firms

  • Sekyung Oh
  • Woo Sung Kim
In corporate finance literature it is well known that how a firm chooses its capital structure depends on its growth opportunity and profitability among many financial and economic variables. According to Fama and French (2002), both growth opportunity and profitability are the main reasons for financing deficits, and the capital structure decisions by firms are closely related to these two variables. There are many competing finance theories or hypotheses that try to explain the relationships between firm’s capital structure and financial and economic variables such as trade-off theory, agency theory, simple pecking order theory, complex pecking order theory, market timing theory and hold-up hypothesis. In this paper, we consider all of the above capital structure theories and hypotheses and test which theories or hypotheses are confirmed and which are not for Korean listed manufacturing companies. In particular, we examine how growth opportunity faced by Korean listed manufacturing firms may affect their choice of capital structure and which capital structure theory best explains financial decision making behaviors of Korean listed manufacturing firms. We extract our data using KISVALUE supplied by National Information and Credit Evaluation (NICE). The sample of our paper consists of 601 Korean manufacturing companies listed both on Korean Stock Exchange (KSE) and on Kosdaq from the period of 2000 to 2010. Based on the sample, we performed panel data analyses. The empirical implications are as follows: First, growth opportunity measured by market-to-book value ratio has a statistically significant positive relationship with book leverage, which is consistent with the simple pecking order theory. However, growth opportunity has a statistically significant negative relationship with market leverage, which is in line with the trade-off theory and/or the complex pecking order theory. According to Fama and French (2002), in the complex pecking order theory, firms are concerned with future as well as current financing costs. Balancing current and future costs, it is possible that firms with large growth opportunities maintain low-risk debt capacity to avoid either foregoing future investments or financing them with new risky securities. Second, we divide the sample into three groups according to the magnitude of their growth opportunity and find the same relationship for all groups as before, which is different from prior studies (Chen and Zhao, 2006; Serrasqueiro and Nunes, 2010), but that the highest growth opportunity firms are least sensitive to debt ratio compared to their lower growth opportunity peers. Moreover, our result seems to suggest that Korean listed manufacturing companies with the highest growth opportunity recognize their financial distress risk higher in the respect that they show low profitability compared to the firms of other countries. In general, it is more effective for the high growth opportunity firms to use more debt financing because they show high profitability and low borrowing cost on average. Third, the simple pecking order theory tested by financing deficit variable is not confirmed because the relationship between debt ratio and financing deficit is significantly positive only for the lowest growth opportunity firms (the other groups have significantly negative coefficients). Furthermore, the simple pecking order theory tested by profitability variable is confirmed because both market and book leverage shows significantly negative relations with profitability. The trade-off theory tested by asset tangibility and firm size variables is confirmed because both market and book leverage shows statistically significant positive relations with them. Also, the trade-off theory tested by bigshare dummy variable is confirmed because it shows a significantly negative relationship with debt ratio, which suggests that the higher the major shareholders’ ownership firms have, the lower the firms’ debt ratios are. Fourth, to test whether the market timing theory is confirmed for Korean listed manufacturing firms, we look at the relationship between debt ratio and external finance weighted average market-to-book ratio. The result depends on whether we use market leverage or book leverage as a dependent variable. We find a significantly positive relationship for book leverage and a significantly negative relationship for market leverage, which suggests that the market timing theory holds only for market leverage in case of Korean listed manufacturing firms. Finally, growth opportunity has a statistically significant negative relationship with bank loan, reinforcing the hold-up hypothesis which claims that firms with high growth opportunity are concerned that their firm-specific information may be monopolized and utilized by banks. According to the grouping analysis based on the magnitude of growth opportunity, the highest growth opportunity firms show a significantly negative relationship between growth opportunity and bank loan, but the lowest growth opportunity firms show a statistically insignificant relationship between them. This seems to suggest that the more growth opportunity firms have, the less preferable are bank loans for them.