有價證券私募法制之研究-以美國法為比較對象

A Comparative Study of Taiwan and US Legal System of Private Placement

賴冠霖(GUAN-LIN LAI)

指導教授 ： 林國彬

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系一般生組/碩士(2016年)

摘要

本篇論文研究題目為：有價證券私募法制之研究-以美國法為比較對象。有鑑於企業籌資在企業發展過程中，不論是在萌芽階段或者是在已發展成熟之階段，基於不同原因，都有籌資之必要。而有價證券私募籌資管道，相較於公開募集，對於公司而言，是為較便利快速之手段。因此，本篇論文希望，透過檢視美國私募發展歷程並了結其核心概念之後，能夠提出相關之建議，使得我國私募制度能夠在不失對投資人保護情形下，促進企業使用此管道籌資之便利性。
本篇論文共分五章。於第一章中，將點出本文著作之動機以及本文之研究方法以及本文架構。由於我國私募制度係參考美國制度而來，因此，在探討我國私募制度現存可能之缺失，以及未來可修訂方向，有必要先行了解私募制度在美國制定之過程以及最新之發展。
第二章為美國私募制度之介紹說明，內容上，首先，將先說明豁免證券與豁免交易在美國法上之地位，並進而帶出屬於豁免交易範疇之私募制度。其次，由於1933年證券法第4條(a)(2)條文中對於“not involving any public offering”並沒有定義，因此衍生出一系列與此條文相關之主管機關函釋、法院見解以及行政命令，而此些內容也成為了探討私募制度的核心。最後，則將以美國近期通過之JOBS法案與私募制度相關部分來做討論。
第三章為我國私募制度之介紹，討論上將分成公司法與證券交易法兩者在主體、客體、程序以及相關限制上之不同來做比較與說明，最後則是整理我國目前法院實務以及學說上，針對現有私募制度相關爭議討論。
第四章則是我國私募制度實務運作概況之說明。首先，整理出我國近兩年私募在整提成資金額及件數上所佔之比例，其次則是整理出目前公司辦理私募所據理由多數為何。再來，針對目前我國因不法行為而爭訟且手法上涉及私募之相關案例做分類說明及探討。最後，則是以併購為主題，舉出兩例以私募為方法之案例。
第五章為本文結論。內容將分別從比較法上以及現有制度上來提出相關看法以及未來建議，希冀能為我國未來私募籌資管道之修訂能有所助益。

關鍵字

JOBS法案 ； 規則144A ； 規則144 ； 章則D ； 私募有價證券 ； 私募制度評析 ； 私募案件

並列摘要

The topic of this paper: A Comparative Study of Taiwan and US Legal System.of Private Placements
In a corporate’s developing process, from its starup till it comes to maturity, though with different reasons , there is always the need of fund-raising. Private placement, comparing with public offering, is a much faster and more convenient way of fund-raising for the company. Therefore, after examining the development of US private funding and understanding its core concept, this paper wishes to provide some useful advises toward the private placement system in Taiwan, in order to promote the convenience of this mean of fund-raising for the corporate while securing the protection of the investors.
There are five chapter in this paper. In the first chapter, I will point out the motive, the method of research and the structure of this paper. Since the regime of private placement in Taiwn is referred to that of the US, before discussing the potential flaws or defects in the current regime in Taiwan and its future possible improvements, it is crucial to have knowledge of the developing process of private placement in the US and its latest development.
Chapter two is the introduction of the US private placement regime. First of all, this paper will elaborate the positions of exempted securities and exempted transactions in US Security Act. Second, because the language of section 4(a)(2)of the 1933 Security Act has no definition on “not involving any public offering”, subsequently, it led to a series of authority’s interpretations, court decisions and administrative orders with relation to this particular matter. These materials become the focus on the research of private placement regime. Finally, this paper will discuss the relevant part of the newly enacted JOBS Act（Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act）concerning private placement.
Chapter three is the introduction of the Taiwan private placement regime. This paper will compare the differences between Corporate Act and Security Exchange Act on regulating subjects, objects, procedures and other relevant limitations of private placement.
Chapter four is the summary of actual practices of private placement in Taiwan. First, this paper will come up with the percentage of private placement in the founding market，then find out the major reasons of why the company nowadays is willing to conduct private placement. Moreover, this paper will categorize and discuss the relevant cases that are arisen from unlawful acts, and such acts are related to private placement. Finally, this paper will cite two cases that use private placement as their mean of merger as example.
Chapter five is the conclusion. In this chapter, this paper will provide relevant view points and advices for future improvement after reviewing the comparative law and the current system, hoping to benefit the future development of private placement as an access of fund-raising.

並列關鍵字

Rule 144A ； Rule 144 ； Regulation D ； Rule 146 ； Private Placement ； JOBS Act

參考文獻

3.王麗娟，我國資本市場私募制度之研究，財政部證券暨期貨管理委員會，1997年6月。

5.任中美，美國歐巴馬總統簽署企業龍騰籌資法案(2012 JOBS Act)，證交資料606期，2012年10月。

9.林嘉娜、陳脩文、李宥營、謝欣蕙，私募有價證券之經營效益分析暨監理制度之探討，證交資料589期2011年5月。

10.林志潔，非常規交易是否包含假交易-最高法院101台上字第5291號刑事判決，台灣本土法學雜誌219期，2013年3月。

21.郭大維，私募有價證券轉讓之限制-評最高法院九十七年台上字第二七二九號民事判決，月旦裁判時報第9期，2011年6月。