論內線交易禁止規範之爭議及再建構──以司法實務為中心

On the Controversy and Reconstruction of the Prohibition Norms of Insider Trading Focusing on Judicial Practice

內線交易(insider trading，另有稱作內部人交易)是在財經犯罪領域最為常見之案件，我國在內線交易罪立法設計多援引自美國法，而美國聯邦證券法是建構在反詐欺(fraud)之之基礎上，其認為公司內部人若知悉重大、未公開消息，即應揭露該消息，否則戒絕交易，否則有欺詐證券市場及交易相對人，嚴重破壞證券市場之公平性，多數國家法律則透過立法明文禁止之規範。
由於我國在繼受美國法之時空背景不同，同時我國體制上為大陸法系(成文法)，兩者間逐漸出現解理上之問題，也衍生構成要件上之爭議，包含:重大消息明確之時點為何、傳遞消息者責任範圍有多廣、知悉說與利用說之爭、司法實務對於內線交易主觀構成要件有無詳究等爭議，以上均是實務上院、檢、辯護人對於內線交易案件必定爭論之點。
此外，我國立法者考量國內經濟犯罪規模不斷、牽涉金額大，而多次修正加重經濟犯罪之刑責，包含內線交易罪之刑責，並獨創我國所特有之『億元條款』，但是這樣的立法設計真能有所成效，還是有違反刑法罪刑相當性原則、比例原則、慎刑原則之疑，此亦是是學界不斷討論之爭議處。
對於內線交易犯罪所得如何計算、共犯間如何計算(連帶與不連帶計算說)以及在刑法沒收專章修正後與內線交易罪間產生扞格效應之處(包含總額說與淨額說之爭)，亦是深值研究之議題。本文則於第六章提出內線交易案件的實證研究，透過整理、分析近 10 年已確定之案件，審酌判決中的量刑因子、定罪率、併檢討重刑化立法之缺失之處。
透過前述的實證研究後提出內線交易罪的反省思，重新檢核內線交易罪真正該被非難、詬病之處為何、與詐欺罪罪質上之差異處、刑責上該不該有所調整、提出積極作為式詐欺與內線交易行為人不作為式之隱瞞、不公開，兩者是否應須有所區隔評價而提出本文見解。
本文於第七章結論處，將綜合前述之爭議問題提出相關之見解，並對於構成要件上提出較具體之判準及修法建議，希透過本論文對於內線交易之爭議問題能整合以及能達到再建構之功能，並提出制度面、根本上之改革芻議，期能對於司法偵查、審判、證券監理單位對於內線交易能有所反思及啟發。

Insider trading is the most common case in the field of financial crimes. The legislative design of the crime of insider trading in my country is mostly based on U.S law, while the U.S.federal securities law is based on anti-fraud . On this basis, it believes that if the insiders of the company know important and undisclosed information, they should disclose the information, otherwise they will refrain from trading, otherwise they will defraud the securities market and the counterparty of the transaction, and seriously damage the fairness of the securities market. Regulations expressly prohibited by legislation.
Due to the different temporal and spatial backgrounds of Taiwan’s succession to American law, and Taiwan’s system is a civil law system (statutory law), the problem of cleavage between the two has gradually emerged, and disputes on the elements of composition have also arisen, including: The timing of material information is clear Why, how wide the scope of responsibility of the person who transmits the information, the dispute between the knowing possession theory and the use theory, whether the judicial practice has detailed investigation of the subjective constituent elements of insider trading, etc. These are the points that must be debated by the upper court of practice, prosecutors, and defenders in insider trading cases.
In addition, considering that the scale of domestic economic crimes is continuous and the amount of money involved is large, Taiwan legislators have repeatedly amended and increased the criminal responsibility of economic crimes, including the criminal responsibility of insider trading crimes, and created the unique "100 million dollars clause" unique to other country. Whether the legislative design can really be effective, there are still doubts about violating the principles of equivalence, proportionality, and prudence of punishment in criminal law.
How to calculate the criminal proceeds of insider trading, how to calculate between accomplices (joint and several calculation theory), and the conflict between the crime of insider trading and insider trading after the revision of the special chapter of criminal law confiscation (including the dispute between the total amount theory and the net amount theory) , is also a subject of in-depth research. This article proposes an empirical study of insider trading cases in Chapter 6. By sorting out and analyzing the cases that have been confirmed in the past 10 years, it examines the sentencing factors and conviction rate in judgments, and reviews the shortcomings of severe punishment legislation.
Through the above-mentioned empirical research, I propose a reflection on the crime of insider trading, re-examine whether the crime of insider trading should really be criticized, what is criticized, the difference in quality from the crime of fraud, whether the criminal responsibility should be adjusted, This article proposes an opinion on whether the positive deed fraud and the insider trading actor’s inaction concealment and nondisclosure should be evaluated separately.
At the conclusion of Chapter 7, this paper will put forward relevant opinions based on the above-mentioned controversial issues, and put forward more specific criteria and suggestions for amendments to the constituent elements. The function of construction, and put forward some tentative suggestions on system and fundamental reforms, hoping to reflect and enlighten the judicial investigation, trial, and securities supervision units on insider trading.