• 국제지역연구
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• pp.369-392
• /
• 2011

순수한 의미의 프로젝트 파이낸스는 일반적으로 프로젝트의 사업성만을 담보로 차입이 이루어진다. 그래서 원금상환에 대한 채무불이행 위험이 높다. 이러한 위험을 해소하기 위하여 감채기금의 개념을 도입한 것이 감채기금을 이용한 프로젝트 파이낸스이다. 이것은 프로젝트 이외의 담보나 보증이 없이도 사업성만을 담보로 감채기금을 이용해 원금을 확보할 수 있는 금융기법이다. 본 논문은 일반적 프로젝트 파이낸스에 대한 감채기금을 이용한 프로젝트 파이낸스의 경제적 효율성을 비교하고 비교우위 조건을 도출하여 분석하였다. 특히 법인세 절감효과를 통해서 살펴보았다. 감채기금을 이용한 프로젝트 파이낸스가 적용되기 위해서는 10년 이상인 장기 프로젝트일 경우에 바람직하다. 복리구조에 의해 원금상환 자금이 형성되는 감채기금은 장기일수록 그 크기와 금융비용이 현실화되기 때문이다. 또한, 연기금이 장기적으로 안정적인 투자수익을 확보하면서 운용되어야 한다는 점에 비추어 볼 때 감채기금을 이용한 프로젝트 파이낸스의 자금조달 원천이 될 수 있을 것이다.

• 플랜트 저널
• /
• 제3권3호
• /
• pp.33-49
• /
• 2007

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제61권
• /
• pp.273-302
• /
• 2014

Project finance ("PF") is a method of raising long-term debt financing based on lending against the cash flow generated by the project alone. Project finance is a nonrecourse or limited recourse financing structure against the sponsors(or the investors). The debt terms in a project finance are not based on the creditor's credit support or on the value of the assets of the project. Lenders rely on the future cash flow to be generated by the project for debt repayment and interest, rather than the value of the project or the credit ratings of the sponsors. The non-recourse or limited recourse financing usually prompt potential project finance lenders to assess carefully all possible risks that might arise in a project to ensure that those risks are mitigated and controlled. In this respect, project finance is a opposite financing method of corporate finance. Project finance has rapidly grown over the last 20 years due to the worldwide process of privatization of public sector and development of natural resources. Global project finance volume reached the record USD 406.5 billion in 2011. In 2012, however, Global project finance volume dropped 6% to USD 382.3 billion. Infrastructure overtook Energy to lead all sectors with USD 113.6 billion. It is generally recognized that there are more and higher risks in project finance compared with corporate finance. Project finance is exposed to commercial risks as well as political risks. The main commercial risks are completion risks, environmental risks, operating risks, input supply risks, revenue risks, etc, and the main political risks are currency convertibility and transfer risks, expropriation risks, war and civil disturbance risks, risks of breach of government concession agreement, etc. Completion risks include permits risks, risks relating to the EPC Contractor, construction cost overrun, delay in completion, inadequate performance on completion, etc.

• 한국건설관리학회논문집
• /
• 제12권2호
• /
• pp.121-132
• /
• 2011

BOT(Build-Operate-Transfer) 프로젝트 파이낸스(PF: Project Finance)는 민간이 자본조달, 건설, 그리고 운영을 맡고 운영수입에서 투자비와 수익을 회수하므로 사업의 위험으로부터 정부를 보호하며 사업자도 특수목적회사를 설립하고 부외 및 비소구 금융을 통해 자본을 조달하기 때문에 채무불이행의 책임으로부터 보호되는 특징을 지닌다. 이와 함께 BOT PF 사업의 금융구조와 특성에 의한 채무불이행위험 완화는 금융시장 경색, 새로운 국제회계기준(IFRS) 도입, 그리고 건설사의 우발채무 등과 맞물려 그 중요성이 부각되고 있으나 현금흐름의 불확실성과 여러 계약조항들이 유발하는 비대칭수익으로 인해 전통 금융 경제이론에 기반한 평가가 어려웠다. 그러므로 본 연구는 BOT PF 고유의 금융구조와 특성에 의한 채무불이행위험 완화효과의 평가를 위해 옵션가격결정 및 관련 금융 경제이론을 토대로 이론모델을 구성하고 사례를 분석함으로써 BOT 사업의 위험관리를 위한 이론적인 틀을 제시하고자 한다. 연구결과에 의하면 BOT 사업의 금융구조 및 특성이 사업자의 채무불이행위험을 완화시키며 특히 관련변수들이 수익성을 악화시키는 방향으로 변화할 때 그 효과가 증가함을 알 수 있었다.

• 한국건설관리학회논문집
• /
• 제15권5호
• /
• pp.127-137
• /
• 2014

프로젝트 파이낸싱(PF) 개발사업은 다수의 차명자와 대규모의 금융조달을 통하여 공사를 수행함으로 국가경제개발과 건축 산업의 발전에 큰 영향을 끼치는 프로젝트의 형태이다. 그러나 국내 PF 개발사업의 경우 프로젝트에 대한 충분한 검토보다는 개발이익의 극대화의 측면에서 프로젝트를 진행함으로 인하여 현재 글로벌 금융위기와 부동산 침체에 의하여 사업의 중단이 속출하고 있다. 이에 본 연구에서는 PF사업의 리스크 요인을 도출하고 이를 요인분석을 통하여 PF사업의 성공영향요인을 도출하였고, 이를 Fuzzy-AHP기법을 활용하여 영향요인에 대한 정량화를 수행하였다. 그리고 도출된 PF 성공영향요인의 실제 사례 평가를 통하여 PF성공평가 점수와 프로젝트의 수익률에 대한 상관관계를 도출할 수 있었으며, 이를 통해 PF사업의 평가를 통하여 프로젝트 의사결정자의 의사결정에 도움을 줄 수 있을 것으로 사료된다.

• 기술경영경제학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 기술경영경제학회 2006년도 제28회 동계학술발표회 논문집
• /
• pp.170-186
• /
• 2006

The guarantee funds for government policy fund, venture capital investment fund, technology guarantee debt are the core parts of the external financing system in the constant technology innovation company. However, the enterpriser's requirement to keep the technology innovation with minimized management intervention and policy maker's hope to advance technology development with clear operation of funds is enough to request for research of the project investment plan to the R&D project. This paper will analyze whether technology innovation company that creates cash flow prefers to the project investment as a financing program or not, and if prefers, what characters of company affect on this preference. The more the company that pursuit the additional R&D activity separated to on-going items becomes over the fixed size, the more prefers the project investment as future external fund-raising. Together with that, this paper suggests that we can apply the plan like special purpose vehicle, SWORD(Stock Warrant Off-Balance sheet R&D) and R&D Limited Partnership as R&D project investment policy, and improve the system itself.

• 대한산업공학회지
• /
• 제39권5호
• /
• pp.429-439
• /
• 2013

The Korean Veterans' Pension Fund has previously pre-purchased Gibril Tower on Business Complex in Dubai, UAE, via a project-financed construction investment. Although the property is near completion, the investor syndicate's attempt to debt-finance due arrears was foiled in Dubai central bank's credit control of real estaterelated loans. Accordingly, the investment coordinator offered an additional capital injection, a collateralized leverage, and a maturity extension to the syndicate. If the syndicate rejects the offer, they may risk a nearcomplete capital loss and a possible default of the main contractor. Otherwise, the syndicate may still face uncertainties regarding interest receivables, principal re-payment, foreclosure, economic recession in Dubai, and the Islamic bond bill in the Korean Parliament. A possible exercise of the latter option may be due to the agency-prone nature of pension fund managers. Given these qualitative risk factors as at April 1, 2011, a real options approach-implied optimal decision suggests an extended and complete cash augmentation into the project finance deal.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제50권
• /
• pp.215-250
• /
• 2011

Korean won overseas construction projects worth 71.6 billion US Dollars in 2010, which exceeded that of 2009 by 45.6%. An overseas construction project is a transaction of large scale, long term project, many parties participating, deferred payment, and of high-technology. It contributes to foreign currency earning, and also leads the nation's export restructuring work towards high value-added one. There are various kinds of risks towards the relevant parties respectively, which are key elements in successfully performing the overseas construction project. There are completion risk, financing risk, operating risk, revenue risk etc, in an employer's place. A contractor may be confronted with payment risk, issuance risk of performance bond, financing risk, performance risk of sub-contractors, and exchange rate risk. In lenders place there are repayment risk, completion risk, and political risk in the host country. In order to mitigate risks, the parties shall take relevant measures or require relevant securities. A contractor needs to evaluate the credibility of an employer in respect of payment risk, and can also request export insurance cover by the Korea Trade Insurance Corporation(the former 'Korea Export Insurance Corporation"). An employer can require a contractor to provide performance bond in respect of completion risk, and employ a well-known first class bank as a mandated arranger to arrange financing with regard to completion risk. Lenders needs to evaluate the credibility of an employer and accomplish feasibility study of the project. Lenders can request insurance cover from export credit agency. Once the parties assess the respective risks and obtain relevant securities, the project will be successfully completed. The success of the project will be sure to bring the parties involved enormous profits and another opportunity to participate in overseas construction project afterwards.

• 플랜트 저널
• /
• 제11권1호
• /
• pp.30-38
• /
• 2015

본 연구는 최근 도입된 단기사채를 통해 한국수출입은행의 대외채무보증과 연계하여 자산유동화 구조에 접목한 자산담보부 단기사채의 금리를 추정하고 해외 투자개발형 민자발전사업의 수주 확대를 위한 프로젝트파이낸스의 한 방안으로 이용할 수 있는지에 대한 것이다. 회사채 신용등급 AA-부터 BBB+까지 건설사 자산담보부 단기사채와 비교한 결과, 자산 유동화 구조와 접목한 한국수출입은행의 대외채무보증부 자산담보부 단기사채는 금리 경쟁력이 있고, 프로젝트의 자기자본수익률이 개선됨을 확인할 수 있었다. 특히, 본 금융구조는 회사채 등급이 낮은 시공사에 적용할수록 더 높은 자기자본수익률 확보가 가능함을 알 수 있었다. 이를 통해, 경쟁력 있는 자산담보부 단기사채 금융조건은 수요 창출 및 수익성 확보는 물론 우리기업의 해외 투자개발형 민자발전사업 수주확대에 기여할 것으로 기대된다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제31권
• /
• pp.27-56
• /
• 2006

Today's financial institutions usually take environmental issues seriously into consideration as they could not evade lender liability in an increasing number of cases. On the international scene, a brand-new concept of the "Equator Principles" in the New Millenium has driven more and more international banks to adopt these Principles in project financing. Sustainable development has been a key word in understanding new trends of the governments, financial institutions, corporations and civic groups in the 21st century. The Equator Principles are a set of voluntary environmental and social guidelines for sustainable finance. These Principles commit bank officers to avoid financial support to projects that fail to meet these guidelines. The Principles were conceived in 2002 on an initiative of the International Finance Corporation(IFC), and launched in June 2003. Since then, dozens of major banks, accounting for up to 80 percent of project loan market, have adopted the Principles. Accordingly, the Principles have become the de facto standard for all banks and investors on how to deal with potential social and environmental issues of projects to be financed. Compliance with the Equator Principles facilitates for endorsing banks to participate in the syndicated loan and help them to manage the risks associated with large-scale projects. The Equator Principles call for financial institutions to provide loans to projects under the following circumstances: - The risk of the project is categorized in accordance with internal guidelines based upon the environmental and social screening criteria of the IFC. - For Category A and B projects, borrowers or sponsors are required to conduct a Social and Environmental Assessment, the preparation of which must meet certain requirements and satisfactorily address key social and environmental issues. - The Social and Environmental Assessment report should address baseline social and environmental conditions, requirements under host country laws and regulations, sustainable development, and, as appropriate, IFC's Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines, etc. - Based on the Social and Environmental Assessment, Equator banks then make agreements with borrowers on how they mitigate, monitor and manage the risks through a Social and Environmental Management System. Compliance with the plan is included in the covenant clause of loan agreements. If the borrower doesn't comply with the agreed terms, the bank will take corrective actions. The Equator Principles are not a mere declaration of cautious banks but a full commitment of lenders. A violation of the Principles in the process of project financing, which led to an unexpected damage to the affected community, would not give rise to any specific legal remedies other than ordinary lawsuits. So it is more effective for banks to ensure consistent implementation of the Principles and to have them take responsible measures to solve social and environmental issues. Public interests have recently mounted up with respect to environmental issues on the occasion of the Supreme Court's decision (2006Du330) on the fiercely debated reclamation project at Saemangeum. The majority Justices said that the expected environmental damages like probable pollution of water and soil were not believed so serious and that the Administration should continue to implement the project seeking ways to make it more environment friendly. In this case, though the Category A Saemangeum Project was carried out by a government agency, the Supreme Court behaved itself as a signal giver to approve or stop the environment-related project like an Equator bank in project financing. At present, there is no Equator bank in Korea in contrast to three big banks in Japan. Also Korean contractors, which are aggressively bidding for Category A-type projects in South East Asia and Mideast, might find themselves in a disadvantageous position because they are generally ignorant of the environmental assessment associated with project financing. In this regard, Korean banks and overseas project contractors should care for the revised Equator Principles and the latest developments in project financing more seriously. It's because its scope has expanded to the capital cost of US$10 million or more across all industry sectors regardless of developing countries or not. It should be noted that, for a Korean bank, being an Equator bank is more or less burdensome in a short-term period, but it must be conducive to minimizing risks and building up good reputation in the long run.