證券交易法之有價證券定義與範圍

The Definition and the Realm of Securities on Securities and Exchange Act

顏鴻彬(Hung-Bin Yen)

指導教授 ： 蔡英欣

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2015年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2015.00017

摘要

有關於證券交易法上有價證券範圍之規定，規定於我國證交法第6條，然自該條條文以觀，我國證交法所規定之有價證券範圍，顯然過於狹隘，無法因應現行金融社會之發展，致生實務上產生許多規範上之漏洞，對投資人保護並不周全。是以，本文欲從我國法現行規範出發，首先釐清我國法所規範之有價證券範圍與規範缺失為何，次就外國法之分析，觀察外國法上對此議題採取何方式規制，最後再透過外國法之借鏡，反思我國法對於有價證券所應建構之抽象概念與規範範圍為何。
於我國法之部分，按我國證交法第6條之規定，僅「個別列舉」政府債券、公司股票、公司債券、新股認購權利證書、新股權利證書、各種有價證券之價款繳納憑證、各種有價證券之表明其權利之證書，以及上述無實體發行有價證券之抽象權利，所揭示之有價證券僅有少數之七種類型。雖然同條第1項賦予「主管機關核定」有價證券之權限，然觀目前已經由主管機關核定之有價證券，亦僅有外國有價證券、外國投資契約、受益憑證、認購（售）權證、資產基礎證券、受益證券、息票等七種有價證券。於法律與主管機關共同建構之有價證券範圍十分狹隘下，導致許多爭議性有價證券，如金融債券、結構債、投資契約、商業票據等，是否應適用證交法之規定管制之，出現爭議。再者，現行法雖賦予主管機關有價證券核定權，然我國主管機關顯然並未積極行使其權限，且於判斷有價證券之該當性時，往往未附理由，欠缺明確之證交法有價證券判斷標準。是以，我國現行法所規範之有價證券範圍，實有必要進行通盤性之檢討，並有必要對有價證券之抽象概念為一明確之定義。
於外國法之觀察上，本文所擇取之外國法為日本法及德國法。在日本法之部分，日本於西元2006年開始，於內國頒布施行金融商品交易法，此金商法之立法目的之一，即在擴大現行法律所規制之有價證券範圍，並藉以達到橫斷性之投資人保護制度。觀日本金商法第2條第1項與第2項之立法規範，日本金商法對於有價證券範圍之規定，係採取「個別列舉」、「政令指定」與「概括規定」三種立法模式，在個別列舉有價證券中列舉多達二十多種之有價證券，並於各項規定中保留政令指定補充有價證券之空間。此外，亦於金商法中新增「概括規定」，將英美法上所承認之投資契約納入有價證券範圍。另觀日本金商法對於有價證券抽象概念與判斷標準之建構，雖然法律目前係以「流通性」、「投資對象性」、「公益性」與「投資人保護必要性」等要件作為判斷有價證券之標準，然學界普遍認為，日本金商法於修正後，對於有價證券之概念，實以「投資對象性」為本，而較忽略有價證券之「流通性」。
在德國法之部分，德國法對於有價證券之範圍，規定於德國證券交易法第2條第1項，此項規定雖特別列舉股份、類似股份之投資與債券為本法之有價證券，然此僅為例示之規定，德國法上對有價證券原則上仍採取「概括規定」之立法模式。觀德國法所揭示之有價證券概念與判斷標準，德國法係以有價證券之「可交換性」與「流通性」作為判斷標準，唯有權利彼此之相等可交換，且得於證券市場交易流通者，始為本法所稱之有價證券。
考察日本法與德國法之規定後，本文認為，對於我國證交法之有價證券，宜仿照外國法，建立明確之判斷要件。在有價證券要件之建構上，本文傾向將「投資性」、「流通性」、「可交換性」、「公開性」與「投資人保護必要性」作為有價證券之判斷標準，並區分「發行市場」與「流通市場」作為法規適用上之區分。於發行市場中，只要有價證券之發行人係對不特定多數人進行事業之募資，此有價證券即該當「投資性」、「公開性」與「投資人保護必要性」，而須適用發行市場之相關規範，並被歸類為證交法所稱之有價證券；然於流通市場中，有價證券除須具有上開三個特性之外，尚需具備有價證券之「流通性」、「可交換性」，發行人須為公開發行公司，其所發行之有價證券必須於證券市場擁有進行交易之可能，始得進一步適用證交法上有關流通市場之規範。本文將前者稱為「第一類有價證券」，將後者稱為「第二類有價證券」，在廣納有價證券之範圍下，同時針對有價證券之類型，做出不同法律適用之區分。
對於我國未來證交法之修正，本文認為，當務之急應擴大現行有價證券之範圍，並建議在未大幅更動現行法制之情形下，同時採用「個別列舉」、「主管機關核定」與「概括規定」三種立法模式，以及考量賦予司法機關參與認定有價證券之可能性。此外，以中長期目標而論，亦得思考是否仿效日本法與德國法之模式，將有價證券與其他金融商品，整合至同一部法律規範，以建構更為完善、規範上相互一致之投資人保護制度。

關鍵字

證券交易法之有價證券 ； 投資性 ； 流通性 ； 公開性 ； 連動債 ； 投資契約 ； 商業票據

並列摘要

Regulation of the realm of securities lies on the article 6 of the Taiwan’s Securities and Exchange Act. However, reviewing this article, it is obvious that the realm of securities is extremely small. Factually, this small realm of securities cannot react to the modern financial society, leads to many vacancies of the regulation and lacks enough protections for the investors in the capital market. Therefore, this thesis tends to start from the present regulation on realm of securities and examine the extent and disadvantages of the regulation. Second, by analyzing the foreign regulations, the thesis tends to observe how foreign countries definite their securities and hence reflect over the regulations of Taiwan to create a reasonable definition and realm of securities on Securities and Exchange Act.
According to the article 6 of Taiwan’s Securities and Exchange act, it uses the way of “respectively listing” to definite the realm of securities and lists government bonds, corporate stocks, corporate bonds, stock warrant certificate, certificate of entitlement to new shares, certificate of payment or document of title to any of the securities referred to in the preceding paragraph and non-physical securities as securities. Although the paragraph 1 of the article 6 has given the “approval power” to the "Competent Authority", the realm is still small and only adds seven more kinds of securities. Under the circumstance of this small range of securities, some controversial securities, such as bank debentures, structured note, investment contract, commercial paper, are still in dispute, whether they are contained in the range of the regulation. In addition, despite the fact that the article gives Competent Authority the approval power, our Competent Authority seems not to conduct this power actively. Even when it approves the securities, it often makes the decision without any explanation. As a result, it is necessary to think over how the act should draw out the line and how the judgment standards of securities should be made.
As the observation of foreign regulations, this thesis chose the Japanese act and the German act. Talking of the Japanese act, Japanese Financial Instruments and Exchange Act was enacted in 2006. One of the aims of this act is to enlarge the realm of securities and hence to construct a whole protection of investors. According to the paragraph 1 and 2 of the article 2, the act adapts “respectively listing”, “approval of the authority” and “general requirement” as the methods of securities regulation. It contains more than 20 securities in the law. In terms of the abstract concept and judgment standards of securities, the act reveals 4 elements─ “investment”, “circulation”, “public interest” and “necessity of investor protection.” It is commonly believed that “investment” is more emphasized than “circulation” when judging securities.
Regarding German act, Germany uses the paragraph 1 of the article 2 on German Securities and Exchange Act to definite the realm of securities. Although the act lists “shares”, “investments similar to shares” and “bonds” as securities, it is still regarded as a “general requirement.” Once the security conforms to the description of the paragraph 1 of the article 2, regardless of its kind, it can still be considered the security on this act. Concerning the abstract concept of securities, the act reveals “ability to be changed” and “circulation” as the judgment standards. Obviously, the German emphasized how securities influence and react to the capital market.
After reviewing the Japanese act and the German act, this thesis thinks it is necessary to build up the judging standards of securities just as the foreign acts do. While constructing the standards of our own, it is better to include these characters of securities─ “investment”, “circulation”, “ability to be changed”, “pubic” and “necessity of investor protection.” In the “issue market”, only the character of “investment”, “pubic” and “necessity of investor protection” should be valued. However, in the “trading market”, all of the above-mentioned characters should be used as the judging standards. In this way, the realm of securities can be widely enlarged but at the same time makes the appeal of regulations separated properly.
Besides, it is also important to reform the present act as soon as possible. This thesis suggests that the act in the future take “respectively listing”, “approval of the authority” and “general requirement” at the same time. On the one hand, it can specifically definite the range of securities. On the other hand, it can make this range more feasible to respond to the newly-coming securities. Moreover, this thesis also suggests that securities and other financial instruments integrate into a single regulation in order to construct the more strong and consistent protection for the investors.

並列關鍵字

Securities on Securities and Exchange Act ； Investment ； Circulation ； Public ； Structured note ； Investment contract ； Commercial paper

參考文獻

陳春山（2012）。《證券交易法》。台北：五南。

王志誠（2009）。《信託法》，4版。台北：五南。

劉連煜（2014）。〈未公開發行公司可否適用證交法證券詐欺規範？─最高法院101年度台上字第703號等刑事判決研究〉，《法令月刊》，65卷9期，頁1-9。

熊全迪（2008）。〈結構型債券法律規範之探討－以定性及投資人保護為中心〉，《法令月刊》，59卷9期，頁42-68。

施智謀（2000）。〈固網股條買賣該當何罪〉，《法令月刊》，51卷11期，頁16-20。