證券交易法上相對委託行為之認定基準－兼評臺灣臺北地方法院107年度金重訴字第17號、109年度金重訴字第12號刑事判決

CCUR > College of Law > Department of Law & Graduate Institute of Law > academic journal > Item 987654321/50902

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://irlib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/50902

Title:	證券交易法上相對委託行為之認定基準－兼評臺灣臺北地方法院107年度金重訴字第17號、109年度金重訴字第12號刑事判決 The Criteria for Determining Matched Orders in the Securities and Exchange Act: Concurrently Comment on the Criminal Judgments of the Taipei District Court [107] Jin-Chong-Su-Zi No. 17 (Taiwan) and [109] Jin-Chong-Su-Zi No. 12 (Taiwan)
Authors:	賴源河(Lai, Yuan-Ho) 王志誠(Wang, Chih-Cheng)
Contributors:	法律系
Keywords:	相對委託操縱市場行為沖洗買賣常態分配高斯分配具體危險犯 Matched Orders Market Manipulation Wash Sales Normal Distribution Gauss Distribution Specific Dangerous Offender
Date:	2021-06-01
Issue Date:	2023-02-14 11:19:26 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	我國證券交易法第155條第1項第3款及第2項禁止對於在證券交易所上市及證券商營業處所買賣之有價證券為相對委託行為。基本上，違法之相對委託行為，必須具備主觀不法構成要件，而其關鍵則在於行為人之主觀意圖。由於主觀意圖之判斷通常必須仰賴客觀之交易情狀加以確認，導致司法實務常有重大爭議。特別是應以何種基準或測試方法認定買方與賣方主觀上有通謀意思聯絡，而以約定價格成交特定有價證券，實牽涉個案具體事實認定之層面，有賴職司審判權責之法院針對各行為人委託下單之態樣、形成撮合成交結果之原因、日數與頻率等客觀情事加以推斷。本文除針對相對委託之立法沿革、法理基礎、不法構成要件等議加以整理分析外，並對於臺灣臺北地方法院107年度金重訴字第17號刑事判決及109年度金重訴字第12號刑事判決略予評述。最後，提出本文之結論，以供參考。 Matched orders for securities listed on stock exchanges market and traded over the counter market are prohibited by the Article 155, paragraph 1, subparagraph 3 and paragraph 2 of the Securities and Exchange Act in Taiwan. Basically, the illegal matched orders must have the subjective constitutive elements, and the key lies in the subjective scienter of the actor. Since judgments of subjective scienter usually must rely on objective transaction conditions to be confirmed, which often leads to major disputes in judicial practice. In particular, what benchmark or test method should be used to determine that the buyer and the seller have a subjective conspiracy to contact, and the transactions of a specific securities at an agreed price actually involves the level of identification of the specific facts of the case, and it depends on the competent court to judge each behavior. It can be inferred from objective factors such as the status of the order placed by the actor, the reason for the result of the matching, the number of days and the frequency. In addition to analyzing the legislative evolution, legal basis, and illegal constitutional elements of the matched orders, this article also provides a brief commentary on the two criminal judgments of the Taipei District Court [107] Jin-Chong-Su-Zi No. 17 (Taiwan) and [109] Jin-Chong-Su-Zi No. 12 (Taiwan). Finally, the conclusion of this article is presented for consideration.
Relation:	華岡法粹； 70期 (2021 / 06 / 01) ， P1 - 36
Appears in Collections:	[Department of Law & Graduate Institute of Law ] academic journal

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
index.html		0Kb	HTML	131	View/Open

View Licence

Loading...