인간의 행위나 판단이 자신이 속한 문화의 지배적 가치에 의해 영향을 받는다는 명제는 비교문화연구에서 널리 입증되어 왔다. 본 연구는 회계감사시장이 개방되고 회계감사기준이 세계적으로 표준화되어 가는 환경변화에도 불구하고 회계감사인의 전문가로서의 판단이 그 감사인이 속한 국가문화의 영향을 받는지를 검증하기 위해 한국과 호주의 Big-Five 감사인을 대상으로 설문조사를 실시하여 얻은 응답 자료에 대해 실증분석을 시도하였다. 연구결과에 따르면 Hofstede(1980)의 문화차원은 여전히 국가문화의 특질을 반영하였지만, 감사인 판단이 국가문화의 차이에서 비롯된다는 가설들은 부분적인 지지를 받았다. 중요성기준 수정정도와 감사시간예산 압력에서 상급감사인의 의견을 수용하는 정도는 문화차이를 반영하였지만 목표감사위험의 수정, 감사보고서 포함사항, 감사절차의 선택과 중요도에서는 체계적인 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 이러한 결과는 본 연구에서 감사인 판단에 영향을 미치는 다양한 환경변수들을 복합적으로 고려하는 정교한 연구설계가 부족한 점도 있지만 감사시장의 세계화 및 감사기준의 표준화로 인해 감사인의 판단마저도 세계적인 동조화현상을 일으켜 이것을 내면화시켜가고 있을 가능성을 암시한다고도 할 수 있다.

Cross-cultural studies have proven that human behavior and judgment are influenced by the dominant values of one`s indigenous culture. This paper attempts to examine whether or not national culture still influences auditor judgment - even under the new audit environment where the audit market becomes open and auditing standards are harmonized and standardized internationally. For this objective, Korean and Australian auditors from the ``Big 5``firms participate in the survey. According to the findings of the survey, Hofstede`s cultural dimensions(1980) reflects the characteristics of national culture but only partially supports the hypotheses that auditor judgment results from differences of national culture. Details are as follows. First, there is no significant difference in modification of acceptable audit risk between Korean and Australian auditors. However, there is the possibility for Korean auditors to lower the amount of materiality when they collect new evidence on a loan default that is evaluated to exhibit substantial doubt about a client`s ability to continue as a going concern. Second, there is no significant difference in deviation degree of audit guidelines between Korean and Australian auditors when they modify initial acceptable audit risk, but in modification of the initial materiality amount, Korean auditors depend more on their audit guidelines than Australian auditors when their client is a widely-held public company under the same situation as the first above. Third, the findings show that inclusion of a client`s loan default in the subsequent period in an audit report may not be influenced by the characteristics of national culture because excluding the inclusion can be a source of potential legal liability and its economic loss. Fourth, incidence of premature sign-offs, such as omission of audit procedures and under-reporting of time caused by time budget pressures, may be influenced by the national culture of power distance and uncertainty avoidance. Fifth, there are no consistent results and systematic differences between the two countries` auditors in selection of audit procedures concerning both the estimation of profit of construction projects and inventory valuations. These results suggest that auditor judgment has become independent of national culture in more sensitive auditor judgment issues and that this trend continues due to globalization of the audit market and harmonization of audit standards.