我國證交法有關連續交易操縱行為構成要件之研究

文化大學機構典藏 CCUR > 法學院 > 法律學系暨法律學研究所 > 博碩士論文 > Item 987654321/50734

jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://irlib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/50734

题名:	我國證交法有關連續交易操縱行為構成要件之研究 A Study on Manipulation by Actual Purchases in Securities and Exchange Act
作者:	李旻哲
贡献者:	法律學系
关键词:	反操縱條款證券詐欺操縱市場連續交易護盤行為 Anti-manipulation provision Market Manipulation Series transactions Securities Fraud stabilization
日期:	2021
上传时间:	2023-02-09 14:47:36 (UTC+8)
摘要:	自臺灣70年代以來，經濟發展及金融環境快速發展，證券交易市場日漸興盛，在政府與私人企業加大對於資金需求量之前提下，透過不同籌集資金之手段，企業得以發行有價證券方式直接向投資人募集資金，而投資人在持有有價證券後亦得在金融市場上出售，從而如何維護場公平性之議題至關重要。金融犯罪類型近年來日益受重視，而我國證券交易法既以「發展國民經濟、保障投資」為目的，證券市場是否不受人為破壞價格決定機制而係依自然供需法則運作，此際至關重要。我國證券交易法第155條第1項第4款，即所謂「不法連續交易」之禁止規定，並針對違反者設有證券交易法第171條刑罰之規範。「不法連續交易」係我國實務上操縱市場最常見之行為態樣，實務及學說對於此均有諸多討論，惟對於本罪構成要件之解釋，卻有所爭議，尤以對於是否須具備「引誘他人從事有價證券買賣之意圖」及「利用股價落差賺取不法利益之意圖」等要素，法院審級間更爭論不休，案件一再發回之情形不為少見；另本條於民國104年7月1日增訂「而有影響市場價格或市場秩序之虞」之要件，惟並未解決上開之爭議，是以有特別釐清之必要。其次，護盤行為本質上即屬於操縱行為，單從文義解釋而言，似不應允許護盤行為存在之空間，惟在某些情況下，允許符合條件之政府、公司及證券承銷商，得以人為之方式干預證券市場，然此時又應如何與連續交易相互調和，誠有深入研究及劃定界線之必要。本文欲從反操縱條款切入，並針對不法連續交易行為分析其構成要件，再以之為出發點，評論及分析實務案例及法院見解，後對護盤行為與操縱行為做界線上之劃分，文末提出修正建議，以作後續相關規定修正之參考依據。 The development of economy and financial environment has been developing rapidly since the 1980s in Taiwan. The stock exchange market is flourishing. Under the circumstance that the government and private enterprises are increasing their demand for funds, enterprises are able to issue their marketable securities to raise funds directly from investors through different means of raising funds. Investors holding securities could also sell it on the financial market. Thus, the issue of maintaining fairness in the market is crucial. Financial crimes are increasingly valued in recent years. “Promoting the national economic development and the protection of investors.” is the purpose of Securities and Exchange Act in our country. It is vital that the securities exchange market operate freely in accordance with the natural supply and demand principle without undermining the mechanism of price determination by human manipulation" Series transactions" is prohibited pursuant to Subparagraph 4, Paragraph 1, Article 155 of the Securities and Exchange Act and it also stipulates the penalty of Article 171 of the Securities Exchange Act for violators. It is the most common type of manipulation in Taiwan. There are many studies in view of practice and doctrine, but the definition of the requisite elements remains a controversial issue The courts hold different opinions regarding the following two elements:“inducing buys and sells of designated securities”or“with the intent to obtain illegal interests via price spread,”which is also not uncommon that cases returned. , Subparagraph 4, Paragraph 1, Article 155 of the Securities and Exchange Act is amended in July 2015. The phrase "there is an impact on the market price or the order of the market order" has been added. However, the controversy still remain. Secondly, stabilization is a manipulation behavior. From the perspective of literal interpretation, it seems that the existence of stabilization is not allowed. However, under certain circumstances, eligible governments, companies and securities underwriters are allowed to intervene in the securities market artificially. At this time, how to reconcile with series transaction is indeed necessary for in-depth research and demarcation. This article intends to start from the anti-manipulation clause. Analyzing the requisite elements of series transaction first. Then giving comments and analysis on practical cases and court opinions. Later, demarcations are elaborated on stabilization and series transaction. Amendment recommendations proposed in the final part of the thesis, offering as a reference for future amendments to relevant regulations.
显示于类别:	[法律學系暨法律學研究所] 博碩士論文

文件中的档案:

档案	描述	大小	格式	浏览次数
index.html		0Kb	HTML	66	检视/开启

检视Licence

在CCUR中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

数据加载中.....