美國內線交易執法實證研究：以SEC 2009至2012年之個案為核心

Abstract

實務上，內線交易行為之禁止已成為趨勢，各國紛紛訂定相關之法規以打擊內線交易，以確保該國證券市場之安全與秩序，希望藉此吸引各方投資人投資。因此，本文目的希望在目前的法律框架底下，觀察證券主管機關對於內線交易之執法現況，特別是針對美國聯邦證券管理委員會之執法進行了解，進而探討何種方法最為理想。 各國對於打擊內線交易之做法不盡相同，美國執法之特色在於其採行多重管道，包括民事、刑事及私人訴訟。此外，聯邦證券管理委員會主導內線交易案件之調查，並掌有民事權力，可與掌管刑事權力之美國司法部合作。最後，聯邦證管會大量地與被告和解，亦為一大特色。然，多重管道執法與大量使用和解不免會產生許多問題，故本文亦會針對可能產生的問題做出說明。 本文首先就美國聯邦證管會之執法權限與架構做概略介紹，接著透過研究2009至2012年間聯邦證管會內線交易之執法案件內容，整理出相關數據，提供讀者美國內線交易違反案件執法的完整樣貌。最後再針對美國現行之多重管道執法與大量和解所可能產生的問題進行討論，進而探究美國之做法，是否為處理內線交易案件最理想之方式。

Whether or not insider trading should subject to regulation is still debatable, however, countries around the world have leaning toward prohibiting insider trading in order to maintain a fair and orderly market. Therefore, this Article does not argue the appropriateness of prohibiting insider trading, but rather accepting the fact that insider trading is made illegal in major securities markets. And under this premise, this Article aims at observing how the securities agency, especially the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, enforces its law as well as what constitutes an ideal way of enforcement. Every countries has its own way of combating insider trading, and the United States adopted a two-layered structure which allows government intervention(includes civil and criminal) and private litigation at the same time. It nonetheless involves cooperation among multiple agencies with Securities and Exchange Commission leading the direction of both policy-making and actual enforcement. Moreover, excessive use of settlement is also a unique characteristic of U.S. securities law enforcement. This Article proceed first with introducing the overall enforcement structure of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and then attempting to understand the real picture by surveying every insider trading enforcement case from 2009 to 2012. Lastly, this Article will briefly discuss the merit and limits of current U.S. approach.