{"title":"예금보험기금의 예상손실규모 추정: 은행산업을 중심으로 (Estimating Deposit Insurance Fund in Korean Banking Industry)","authors":"Hong-Sun Song","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3018271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<b>Korean Abstract:</b> 본 논문은 예금보험기금을 예상손실을 충당하기 위한 준비금 개념으로 이해하는 것이 예금보험제도의 특수성을 감안할 때 합리적일 수 있음을 주장하고, 예상손실 개념에 따라 예금보험기금을 추정하고 이 과정에서 고려할 몇 가지 추정 상의 이슈를 검토하였다. 우선 예금보험기금의 익스포저는 부보예금보다 총부채 개념을 사용하여 익스포저와 정리방식과의 연계를 강화였으며 손실률 역시 외환위기 이후 부실은행의 경험손실률을 추정하여 사용하였다. 부도율은 EDF모형을 사용하되, 은행의 특수성을 감안하고 신용위험의 fat-tail 특성을 감안한 분포를 가정하여 추정하였다. 그 결과, 예상손실에 따른 예금보험기금은 부보예금의 1.3%로 추정되어 예상외손실을 포함한 선행연구들과 유사한 결과를 보였는데, 이는 주로 익스포저의 차이에서 기인한 것으로 나타났다.<br><br><b>English Abstract:</b> This paper estimates deposit insurance funds in the Korean banking industry using the expected loss methodology. This paper argues that estimating the fund by employing the credit risk model is not proper in light of the definition of deposit insurance fund. Deposit insurance having any paid-in capital covers just as much as the expected losses from failed financial institutions while government as an ultimate risk-absorber covers the unexpected losses. In estimating expected loss, this paper revises the EDF model to capture the characteristics of commercial banks and fat-tail characteristics of credit loss. The deposit insurance fund is estimated at about 1.3 % of total insured deposits. This happens to be a similar estimate in comparison with that of earlier research using the credit risk model. The similarity stems from the difference in definition of exposures at risk between the two approaches.","PeriodicalId":166226,"journal":{"name":"Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation (KDIC) Research Paper Series","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation (KDIC) Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3018271","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Korean Abstract: 본 논문은 예금보험기금을 예상손실을 충당하기 위한 준비금 개념으로 이해하는 것이 예금보험제도의 특수성을 감안할 때 합리적일 수 있음을 주장하고, 예상손실 개념에 따라 예금보험기금을 추정하고 이 과정에서 고려할 몇 가지 추정 상의 이슈를 검토하였다. 우선 예금보험기금의 익스포저는 부보예금보다 총부채 개념을 사용하여 익스포저와 정리방식과의 연계를 강화였으며 손실률 역시 외환위기 이후 부실은행의 경험손실률을 추정하여 사용하였다. 부도율은 EDF모형을 사용하되, 은행의 특수성을 감안하고 신용위험의 fat-tail 특성을 감안한 분포를 가정하여 추정하였다. 그 결과, 예상손실에 따른 예금보험기금은 부보예금의 1.3%로 추정되어 예상외손실을 포함한 선행연구들과 유사한 결과를 보였는데, 이는 주로 익스포저의 차이에서 기인한 것으로 나타났다.
English Abstract: This paper estimates deposit insurance funds in the Korean banking industry using the expected loss methodology. This paper argues that estimating the fund by employing the credit risk model is not proper in light of the definition of deposit insurance fund. Deposit insurance having any paid-in capital covers just as much as the expected losses from failed financial institutions while government as an ultimate risk-absorber covers the unexpected losses. In estimating expected loss, this paper revises the EDF model to capture the characteristics of commercial banks and fat-tail characteristics of credit loss. The deposit insurance fund is estimated at about 1.3 % of total insured deposits. This happens to be a similar estimate in comparison with that of earlier research using the credit risk model. The similarity stems from the difference in definition of exposures at risk between the two approaches.
储蓄保险基金预计损失规模推定:以银行业为中心(Estimating Deposit Insurance Fund in Korean Banking Industry)
korean abstract:本论文是为了充当预计存款保险基金损失的准备金概念理解为是存款保险制度的特殊性,考虑到有可能合理主张,并根据预期损失概念存款保险基金推测,在此过程中,考虑几种推测上的焦点问题进行了讨论。首先,储蓄保险基金的亏损比附保存款更使用总负债概念,加强了亏损和整理方式的联系,损失率也是根据外汇危机后亏损银行的经验损失率推定使用的。拒付率使用EDF模型,但考虑到银行的特殊性和信用风险的fat-tail特性。其结果,预计损失的存款保险基金被推定为附加存款的1.3%,与包括预想外损失在内的先行研究结果相似,这主要是由风险的差异引起的。英语:This paper estimates deposit insurance funds in the Korean banking industry using the expected loss methodology。This paper argues that estimating the fund by employing the credit risk model is not proper in light of the definition of deposit insurance fund。Deposit insurance having any paid-in capital covers just as much as the expected losses from failed金融institutions while government as an ultimate risk-absorber covers the unexpected losses。In estimating expected loss, this paper revises the EDF model to capture the characteristics of commercial banks and fat-tail characteristics of credit lossThe deposit insurance fund is estimated at about 1.3% of total insured deposits。This happens to be a similar estimate in comparison with that of earlier research using the credit risk model。The similarity stems from The difference in definition of exposures at risk between The two approaches。