經濟刑法中證券市場操縱行為之研究—以證券交易法第155條第1項第3款為中心

A Study of the Securities Market Manipulation in Economic Criminal Law – Focusing on Article 155, Paragraph 1, Sub-paragraph 3 of Securities and Exchange Act

林聖峯(Sheng-Fong Lin)

指導教授 ： 徐育安

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系法律專業組/碩士(2014年)

摘要

證券市場主要功能之一，在於形成證券之公平價格，投資人可基於充足而正確的資訊，依證券價格之主觀體認，透過證券交易市場之供需關係，並經由市場經濟體制自由運作，以競價方式形成證券之買賣價格。然而，原應透過市場供需法則自然形成的證券價格，若有人透過操縱市場行為，以不實的交易行為，或散布不實的資訊，製造證券供需及價格變動之假象，則將發生誤導投資人，進而扭曲證券交易的價格與數量，破壞自由市場機能，減損市場籌集資本及資源有效配置功能等危害。因此，目前許多國家對於市場操縱行為咸明文禁止，而我國證券交易法承襲美國與日本立法例，在證券交易法第155條對於市場操縱行為同樣明文禁止。

有關我國證券交易法第155條第1項第3款「相對委託」，係市場操縱行為態樣之一，亦為經濟刑法所規範之對象，惟本款於主觀構成要件及客觀構成要件並不明確，有諸多疑義尚待釐清。因此，本文試圖先從市場操縱行為之概念、立法沿革及態樣進行理解，再從學理與實務上探討本款之構成要件及牽涉之相關問題，並輔以美、日立法例進行比較分析，期使本款能合於經濟刑法之規範目的下，俾利實務工作者能正確的認事用法，並作為日後立法或修法上的參考。

關鍵字

經濟刑法 ； 相對委託 ； 操縱市場 ； 證券市場

並列摘要

One of the main functions of stock market is to achieve fair prices of securities. The investors can be based on adequate and accurate information, and subjective understanding of the prices of securities, and stock market’s supply and demand, and the free operation via a free market economy, in order to forming transaction price by bid. However, the prices of securities should have formed naturally by laws of supply and demand. If anyone manipulated through false transaction, or spread false information, attempted to produce the illusion of supply and demand and changes in securities prices, will occur misleading investors and distorting the price and quantity of securities transactions, and the destruction of the free market function, and impairment of the market to raise stock and effective allocation of resources function and other hazards. Thus, for many countries expressly prohibit market manipulation. Securities and Exchange Act of Taiwan was inherited legislation of the United States and Japan. Article 155, Securities and Exchange Act was also expressly prohibited for market manipulation.

"Matched orders" is set by Article 155, Paragraph 1, Sub-paragraph 3 of Securities and Exchange Act, which is kind of the market manipulation, and it is economic criminal law. However, Article 155, Paragraph 1, Sub-paragraph 3 of Securities and Exchange Act of subjective elements and objective elements are not clear, many issues to be clarified. Therefore, this article attempts to start understanding the concept of market manipulation, the legislative history and the types, then to explore issues related to this sub-paragraph and the component element involved from the theoretical and practical, supplemented by legislation of the United States and Japan were compared. It can be conformed to this sub-paragraph purpose of regulation of economic criminal law, and expected to serve justice practitioners can how to apply the laws, and as a reference for future legislation or amending the law on.

並列關鍵字

matched orders ； market manipulation ； stock market ； economic criminal law

參考文獻

24、林麗青，證券市場操縱行為之成立—最高法院九六年台上字第二六０號民事判決簡評，台灣本土法學雜誌，第100期，2007年11月。

38、郭土木，證券交易法刑事責任問題之探討，財政部暨所屬機構八十年度研究發展項目研究報告，財政部證券暨期貨管理委員會，1991年7月。

13、何耀琛，證券市場操縱行為之認定與要件—簡評最高法院九六年台上字第一０四四號判決，台灣本土法學雜誌，第97期，2007年8月。

58、廖大穎，鑑識會計與財經犯罪的訴訟支援－論證交法第155條第1項意圖抬高或壓低市場交易價格等的不法要件，朝陽商管評論，第10卷特刊期，2012年5月。

6、王育慧，最高法院91年度台上字第3037號判決及臺灣高等法院88年度上重訴字第39號判決之評釋（東隆五金案）—以連續交易操縱行為與內線交易為範圍，臺北大學法學論叢，第61期。