회계원칙 규정방식과 감리가능성이 감사인의 의사결정에 미치는 영향: 리스 규정을 중심으로 (Effects of Type of Accounting Standards and Audit Review Probability on Auditors’ Lease Judgment)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국경영학회
· 수록지 정보 : 경영학연구 / 42권 / 1호 / 85 ~ 120페이지
· 저자명 : 심태섭, 배수진

초록

최근 국제회계기준(IFRS)의 도입으로 회계원칙의 규정방식이 규정중심에서 원칙중심으로 변화되었다. 종전 규정중심의기준은 특정 회계처리 기준을 숫자로 제시하거나 세부항목을 명확하게 열거하였다. 이에 반해 원칙중심의 기준은 해당 기준의 적용에 대한 최소한의 사례나 지침 등의 구술적 기준을 바탕으로 원칙을 제시하고, 이 원칙의 범위 내에서 회계담당자가 합리적으로 판단하여 회계처리를 할 수 있다. 본 연구에서는 기존의 규정중심의 기준과 현재 IFRS가 표방하고 있는원칙중심의 기준이 이를 적용하는 감사인의 판단에 미치는 영향을 파악하였다. 더불어 새로운 회계제도의 도입 이후, 규제기관의 감리가능성 확대가 감사인의 판단에 미치는 영향을 검증하였다. 연구방법은 실험방법을 이용하였으며, 자료수집은 설문지를 이용하였다. 실험참여자는 리스분류와 관련된 가상의 감사상황에서 피감사기업의 회계처리의사결정을 수행하도록 설계하였다. 처리변수는 회계원칙 규정방식(원칙중심 vs. 규정중심)과 감리가능성(높음 vs. 낮음)으로 설계(2*2,집단간 요인)되었다. 회계원칙 규정방식 중 원칙중심기준으로 리스에 대한 K-IFRS규정을 그리고 규정중심기준으로 리스에대한 일반기업회계기준을 제시하였다. 종속변수는 감사인의 리스분류의사결정으로 측정하였다. 본 연구의 실험대상자는현재 4대 대형회계법인소속으로 3년 이상의 감사경력을 보유한 공인회계사로 한정하였다. 자료분석결과, 명확한 규정중심의 기준 보다 불명확한 원칙중심의 기준에서 감사인은 의뢰인에게 더 유리한 방향의 의사결정(공격적 의사결정)을 하는것으로 나타났다. 그러나 감리가능성이 증가할 때 이러한 의사결정성향은 감소하였으며, 특히 원칙중심 하에서 더 많이감소하였으나 통계적 유의성은 나타나지 않았다. 이에 IFRS와 같은 원칙중심의 기준하에서 감사인의 공격적 의사결정을줄일 수 있는 방향으로 IFRS 기준에 대한 보완이 요구된다. 또한 실험참여자간 응답의 일치정도(consensus)를 검토한결과, 원칙중심의 기준하에서 감사인들이 동일한 거래에 대하여 서로 다른 회계처리를 선택할 가능성이 증가하는 것을 발견하였다. 그리고 감독기관의 감리가능성을 증가시킬지라도 서로 다른 회계처리를 할 가능성은 감소하지 않았다. 이러한연구결과는 원칙중심의 기준인 IFRS 하에서는 애매한 기준의 내용을 회계관련 의사결정자에 따라 다르게 해석할 가능성이 증가될 수 있음을 시사한다. 따라서 IFRS와 같은 원칙중심 하에서 동일한 거래에 대하여 감사인별로 서로 다른 회계처리를 할 경향을 감소시킬 수 있는 방향으로 기준을 보완할 필요가 있다.

영어초록

With the recent adoption of IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards) in Korea,the type of accounting standards has been changed from a rule-based standard to a principlebased standard. Rule-based standards typically provide very detailed guidelines and bright line tests by using numerically expressed rules in determining the correct accounting treatments for a transaction or event. In contrast, principle-based standards are documents of broad principle,which rely on the professional judgement of the users of the standards. In principle-based standards, most principles are expressed verbally with few rule and guidelines for specific accounting treatment. According to psychology research, the verbally expressed standards (principle-based) are perceived less precise than the numerical stated standards (rules-based).
By providing broad principle, principle-based standards allow users to do discretionary accounting treatment within the principles. Principle-based approach, therefore, makes it possible for a manager to choose the accounting treatment suited for their corporate circumstances. However,there might be a possibility of expanding a manager's tendency to make an opportunistic choice when deciding accounting treatment or to spread aggressive financial reporting. Also,preparers or auditors may treat the same accounting transactions differently, because there are no specific rules in a principle-based standard.
The previous research have analyzed the influence of the types of accounting standards on preparers' financial reporting judgments. Many studies reported that principle-based standards mitigate aggressive reporting decision, but the opposite results are also reported. In Korea, a principle-based standard, Korean-IFRS, has been implemented since 2011, so the impacts of such standard-type changes need to be studied.
This paper investigates the effect of type of accounting standards on the judgments of auditors in lease classification. Additionally, this study analyses the effect of audit review probability on auditors' decision, because under a principle-based standard it is needed to reduce auditors aggressive reporting by the audit review of the supervisory authority.
Therefore, this paper examines the effects of types of accounting standards (principle-based vs. rule-based) and audit review probability (high vs. low) on auditors' lease classification decision. In Korea, there are two kinds of accounting standards; (1) Korean-IFRS is for mainly publicly listed companies and (2) Korean-GAAP for unlisted companies. In lease classification provision, Korean-IFRS accepted principle-based approach like IFRS (major part of the economic life of the asset). However, Korean-GAAP is a rule-based standard (75% or more of the estimated economic life of the leased asset). In this study, Korean-IFRS is regarded as a principle-based standard, and Korean-GAAP is considered as a rule-based standard.
This study conducted an experiment and collected the data by a questionnaire. Two treatment variables ((1) Type of accounting standards (principle-based vs. rules-based), (2) Audit review probability (high vs. low)) were manipulated as between-subject. Accordingly this experiment is designed with 4 groups. The dependent variable is measured as auditors' lease classification decision by 11-point scale. The subjects are auditors presently working at Big 4 accounting firms in Korea, and having at least three years’experience as auditors.
The procedure of the experiment consists of 3 steps. In the first step, subjects responded the questions related to demographics and risk preferences. Next second step, the questionnaires provided a fictitious audit situation related to lease classification decision (capital lease or operating lease). The subjects were assumed as auditors of hypothetical company. And they were provided guidelines for classifying a lease, information about acquisition of a leased asset, and other conditions with regard to the hypothetical company. Additionally they were provided information about the impacts of different accounting treatments on the company's financial statements. After considering the case information, subjects responded their lease classification decision. In final step, subject completed questions for manipulation check.
The analysis of results are as follows. First of all, subjects in a principle-based standard are significantly more likely to take aggressive position in classifying the leases than those under a rule-based standard. Second, under a higher audit review probability, subjects are more likely to decide aggressively, but this result is not statistically significant. In addition, by examining the consensus of the classification decision, under a principle-based standard, the tendency of different accounting treatment for same accounting transactions increases. Also,this tendency does not decrease by increasing audit review probability.
The results above suggest the implications as follows. First of all, there is a need to include an additional standard within IFRS (including Korean-IFRS) to mitigate the aggressive financial decision of auditors or preparers. Also, by providing more detailed rule in current IFRS or by continuously educating auditors, the tendency for different accounting treatments for same transactions can be decreased.

참고자료

· 없음