Securities Markets--A Place to Get Rich Quick or a Quicksand Going Straight to Jail? The Mens Rea Required for Insider Trading Criminal Liability

證券市場--致富的天堂或入獄直通車?論內線交易刑事責任主觀構成要件之「故意」

內線交易是個典型的白領犯罪類型,現今國際社會一致發展出相當完備的規範來禁止內線交易的行為,美國是世界上第一個禁止內線交易的國家,至今也仍持續地主導國際上對於內線交易的規範、預防及制裁。在美國,其證券交易委員會(SEC)被賦予權力實施各種行政手段防制內線交易的發生,該委員會並可以對於內線交易的行為進行行政制裁、提起民事損害賠償訴訟,甚至可以依重罪之罪名提起刑事訴追。在美國證券詐欺的案件中,儘管構成民事和刑事責任的要件不同,但構成刑事責任的要件,卻比構成民事責任的要件模糊。隨者法理的發展,內線交易犯罪中「內部人」責任已從傳統上對自己公司忠實義務的違反,擴展到「私取理論」中對於「消息來源」義務的違反,美國最高法院闡明內線交易的刑事責任在正當法律程序的保護下,必須證明被告對所被指控內線交易的行為有主觀上的「故意」方才構成刑事犯罪。然而,實務上隨著內線交易禁止的範圍愈廣,但犯案的情節也愈趨複雜,美國法院對於違反內線交易的案件,就刑事責任主觀要件「故意」的解釋與認定卻不一致。本文試圖梳理美國法院的見解,說明美國法中構成內線交易犯罪之主觀犯意,並建議認定內線交易刑事犯罪主觀構成要件中「故意」的妥適標準。

Insider trading is a prototypical white collar crime which always captures public attention and the prohibition against insider trading is now a well-established international norm. The United States was the first country in the world to develop the prohibition of insider trading, and today the U.S. continues to lead international regulation and enforcement regarding the prevention of insider trading. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC") has been granted various administrative and enforcement powers to investigate, pursue and punish insider trading cases, including through administrative sanction, civil proceedings, and criminal prosecutions charging insider trading as a felony under the Securities Exchange Act. While differences exist in the predicate elements establishing both civil and criminal liability in securities fraud cases, the elements supporting a criminal prosecution are broader than the elements for the civil cause of action.  As the scope of potential liability has expanded from the violations of fiduciary duties owed to one's own company in the traditional insider trading scenario to the duty owed to the source of information" in misappropriation" cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has declared that due process safeguards to imposing criminal liability for insider trading requires proof of a defendant's willfulness" in respect to the alleged criminal insider trading acts. The prohibition of insider trading has become both broader and much more complicated. Unfortunately, there has been a little judicial consistency regarding the interpretation of the meaning of willfulness" in alleged insider trading violations. This article will attempt to articulate and explain an appropriate standard for the mens rea, or criminal intent requirement for insider trading in the U.S.