선택지정제도 도입 시 금융위원회가 제안한 6년은 계속감사기간으로 적정한가?

초록

On January 22, 2017, the Financial Services Commission (FSC) announced that it would plan to adopt the selected auditor designation regime as a measure for improving the nation's accounting transparency. However, there is not enough empirical evidence that how long positive effects of continuing audit last. The purpose of this study is to examine whether it is appropriate to limit the continuing audit period to 6-year as suggested by the FSC, through analyzing the changes in audit quality. Linear regression analysis results show that the longer the continuing audit period, the better the audit quality. However, in nonlinear regression analysis, the audit quality has been improved until six years, but it deteriorated if the continuing audit period was over six years. Under the presence of conflicting opinions on adoption of the new regime (selected auditor designation), this study may give some suggestions to stakeholders, such as supervisory agencies including the FSC, auditors, audited firms by providing an empirical evidence for the turning point (6-year), which is proposed by the FSC. Also, this study shows that assuming the linearity in regression analysis for the association between continuing audit period and changes in audit quality, the results and interpretations can be showed spuriously.

키워드