操縱股價構成要件之評析-以連續交易之新修法與監視報告為核心

Abstract

我國證券交易法第155條第1項就操縱證券市場之行為加以規範，其中第4款之連續交易操縱行為，為實務上最常見的操縱態樣，然該款法條構成要件因文字用語不明確，導致構成要件在實務解釋上產生諸多疑義。本款最近一次修正公布係於民國104年7月1日，並新增「有影響市場價格或市場秩序之虞」之構成要件，本次修正是否有助於解決原本構成要件文字上爭議，或造成另一個不明確構成要件，尚有疑義。 因證券交易法第155條第1項第4款法條文字在實務適用上產生的不明確及法官證金融專業不足等因素，臺灣證券交易所出具之監視報告占有重要地位，常為司法機關在判決時之重要參考資料，然而監視報告製作機關的授權問題及其證據能力，在實務上衍生許多爭議。本文擬就未來連續交易之修法，併同法院在判決時能參照其他具有專業知識之司法輔助機構諸如專家證人或鑑識會計等，以為構成要件判斷時之司法支援等互為配套，提出建議，期使司法資源更有效利用。

Article 155 of the Securities and Exchange Act regulates stock market manipulation. Article 155, Paragraph 1, subparagraph 4 of the Act is related to the “series transactions” manipulation, it is the most common type of all manipulative activities. However, due to the indefinite wording of the Art.155(1)(4), there are different interpretations when adopting the same law into judicature practice. The latest amendment of Art.155(1)(4) was promulgated on July 1st, 2015, it remains an open question that this amendment could help resolve the discrepancy in interpretations or complicate the judgement of the element. Because of the indefinite wording of Art.155(1)(4) and lack of securities professional of courts, courts refer to TWSE‘s stock surveillance reports to judge the elements of series transactions. However, surveillance reports have some controversial problems in practice such as authority of TWSE and derivative issue of evidence credibility. Above all, this thesis provides some recommendation on Art.155(1)(4) for future amendment and other options for reference when courts judge the elements of series transactions like expert witness and forensic accounting for judicial support.