論台灣生技新藥產業之投資人保護制度

On the Investor Protection Regulation for New Drug-developing Biotech Industry in Taiwan

劉思妤(Szu-Yu Liu)

指導教授 ： 李崇僖

臺北醫學大學/人文暨社會科學院/醫療暨生物科技法律研究所/碩士(2017年)

摘要

台灣政府為促進生技醫療產業發展，於2010 年6 月通過「生技新藥產業發展條例」，整體生技產業蓄勢待發，政府透過該條例，提供租稅優惠與各項產業利多政策，欲創造高產值的新興知識產業，提升台灣總體經濟發展。惟生技產業蓬勃發展且受到各界矚目同時，陸續衍生出值得探討的相關問題，特別是以新藥開發為公司主要營運項目公司，在新藥開發階段，需長時間投入且耗費龐大資金，其欲籌措資本，選擇在公開市場上籌資，於台灣資本市場公開上市(櫃)後，所引
發之爭議。
綜觀從 2014年基亞生技股份有限公司(公司股票代碼：371，6以下簡稱基亞)，因新藥研發失敗，公司股價連續20 天跌停，公司市值大幅縮水，至2016 年新藥公司台灣浩鼎生技股份有限公司(公司股票代碼：4174，以下簡稱浩鼎)亦因乳癌新藥療法公布解盲結果，療效不符合預期數據，使浩鼎公司股價一蹶不振，連帶其他生技類股亦受到波及，整體生技產業公司市值比照去年同期，大部分公司市值均大幅縮水，連帶市場投資人對於投資生技產業裹足不前，使產業籌資面臨困境。
此二事件不僅對生技產業投下震撼彈，後續更引發不少重大爭議，生技新藥公司進入資本市場籌資，上市櫃掛牌後，公司股價存有異常報酬率或大幅波動、資訊揭露不明、股權分布疑義、甚至涉及違反證交法中內線交易、操縱股價等情事。對於生技新藥產業的上市籌資，產業未來發展蒙上一層陰影，相關後續效應一一浮現。
本文關注台灣生技新藥產業的發展，深入研究基亞、浩鼎二大事件，對生技新藥產業造成的影響；針對證券交易法，是否有更明確且周全的規範，在法政策學之下，以投資人保護為核心，探究如何強化投資人之保障，近一步健全資本市場之發展；再借鏡外國立法例，台灣相關主管機關的管理制度、法規命令或相關措施，能否更加完善，以期生技產業在未來上市籌資與市場投資人保護，能創造雙贏之局勢。

關鍵字

生技產業 ； 新藥開發 ； 投資人保護 ； 資本市場 ； 資訊不對等 ； 公開揭露

並列摘要

In order to advance the development of Biotechnology and Medical Industry,Taiwanese government adopted the "Biotechnology and New Medical Industry Development Regulation" in June, 2010. The whole biotechnology industry has been flourishing as a result. With this regulation, the government provides tax cuts and various favorable policies to create a new high-productivity industry and boost economic development. However, the biotechnology industry boom has also brought to everyone’s attention several issues worth discussing in detail .In particular, companies that develop new drugs require a long time and considerable amounts of capital to invest on the development of said drugs.These companies choose to raise the funds on the open market, and controversy ensued as they became listed companies at stock exchange (over-the-counter) market.

Providing an overview of Medigen Biotechnology Corp.(MBC) and OBI Pharma, Inc.(OBI). On 2014, due to the failure of new drug research and development, MBC’s share price take a nose dive. Market capitalization of companies specialized in biotechnology has shrunk dramatically; on 2016, due to
the unblinded result snot meeting the expected quotas, OBI’s share price collapsed and other associated biotech stocks have also been affected.Compared with the same period from the previous year, most of the Biotechnology Corps are losing money and making financing the industry rather
difficult.

These two incidents not only left the biotech industry shaken, but also triggered many major controversies. These controversies stemmed from the fact that after raising capitals on the open market, and becoming listed companies on the stock exchange market, biotech companies would not only present heavily fluctuating stock prices, but also refuse to disclose vital information and often be involved with inside trading etc. casting a shadow over the prospect of future development, as well as revealing the darker side of this industry.
This article focuses on the development of biotechnology and medical industry in Taiwan, which is deeply affected by the stock exchanging laws; it is therefore crucial for these two cases to be discussed in depth, as they are
undeniably connected with the legislation concerning investors’ protection. Since the main objective of this policy is to protect investors, it is necessary to
understand how to effectively safeguard them and secure the development of our open market; this can be achieved by borrowing from foreign Countries’legislations. Whether the Taiwanese government can perfect the managing system, law regulations or any relative measure or not, depends on the ability of biotech companies to improve their capital raising methods and investors’protection measures, which would benefit both sides.

並列關鍵字

Biotechnology and Medical Industry ； New drugs ； investors’protection ； capital market ； Information disclosure

參考文獻

1. 温惠玲，2017 年，台灣生技產業股價與資訊揭露關聯性探討-以浩鼎公司為例，中原大學會計研究所學位論文

1. 行政院衛生署食品藥物管理局，TFDA成立對產業發展之影響

3. 邱正雄，2000 年，台灣資本市場發展與經濟成長，財團法人國家政策研究基

5. 國家政策研究基金會，台灣資本市場發展與經濟成長

1. 最高法院104年台上78號刑事判決