政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/37128
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113318/144297 (79%)
Visitors : 51077534      Online Users : 910
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version
    政大典藏 > College of Law > Department of Law > Theses >  Item 140.119/37128


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/37128


    Title: 證券詐欺構成要件論
    The Requirements of Securities Fraud
    Authors: 戴銘昇
    Dai,Mean Sun
    Contributors: 林國全
    戴銘昇
    Dai,Mean Sun
    Keywords: 證券詐欺
    行為要件
    客體要件
    主觀要件
    主體要件
    securities fraud
    behavior requirement
    object requirement
    mental requirement
    subject requirement
    Date: 2007
    Issue Date: 2009-09-19 12:13:24 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 證券市場是企業取得營運資金最主要的管道，也是國民資金投資最佳的選擇，惟前提是必須有一個健全的證券市場，使投資人能安心地將資金投入其中。為了建立這樣的一個投資環境，就必須有要完善的證券法規，當中，主要職司這個功能的就是「證券詐欺法制」。
    基於證券詐欺法制在證券法規中所居的關鍵性地位，其良莠不能不說是與國家經濟的健全與否息息相關，因此，本文便以此一主題為研究對象，主要的研究範圍設定在證券詐欺之「構成要件」，定名為「證券詐欺構成要件論」。而「因果關係」只是在證明請求權的存在與否，可與「構成要件」切割，故本文並不包含此一議題。
    本文所使用之資料，有相當大的比例是美國(1934年證券交易法Section 10(b))與我國(證券交易法第二十條第一項)的法院判決，以增進本文的實證價值。依據本文之研究，無論是行為要件、客體要件、主觀要件或主體要件，都著實存在相當的瑕疵待修補。希冀本文所得出之研究結論，能為修補這些瑕疵盡到些許的功效。
    The securities market is the most important channel that enterprises gain their business capital; it is also the best option that nationals invest their money to. But this is on the premise that there is a sound securities market. In order to establish this kind of investment environment, a set of flawless securities statutes is needed. Within this legal system, this major function is exercised through the “securities fraud regime.”
    The securities fraud regime is decisive of the soundness of the securities statute and nation’s economy. Therefore, this dissertation selects this topic as research subject. The scope of this dissertation is restricted in the “requirement ” of the securities fraud. The title is: “The Requirements of Securities Fraud.” The causation element is just an attestation of plaintiff’s plea, it can be separated from “requirement,” therefore, this issue is excluded in this dissertation.
    The references this dissertation cited are mainly from U.S. and Taiwan’s court decisions. According to the research this dissertation did, no matter behavior requirement, object requirement, mental requirement or subject requirement, there are quite some loopholes that need to be fixed. The writer hopes the conclusion that this dissertation comes up with can somewhat fixed these loopholes.
    Reference: 美國文獻
    書籍(以名排序)
    1. ARNOLD S. JACOBS, 5B LITIGATION AND PRACTICE UNDER RULE 10b-5 (rev. ed. 1993).
    2. DAVID L. RATNER, SECURITIES REGULATION IN A NUTSHELL (3d ed. West Publishing Co. 1988) (1978).
    3. 1 HAROLD S. BLOOMENTHAL, SECURITIES LAW HANDBOOK (2006 ed. Thomson West).
    4. 2 HAROLD S. BLOOMENTHAL, SECURITIES LAW HANDBOOK (2006 ed. Thomson West).
    5. LOUIS LOSS & JOEL SELIGMAN, FUNDAMENTALS OF SECURITIES REGULATION (5th ed. Aspen Publishers 2004).
    6. THOMAS L. HAZEN, THE LAW OF SECURITIES REGULATION (2d ed. 1990).
    期刊(以名排序)
    1. Alan R. Bromberg & Lewis D. Lowenfels, Aiding and Abetting Securities Fraud: A Critical Examination, 52 ALB. L. REV. 637 (1988).
    2. Andrew S. Gold, Reassessing the Scope of Conduct Prohibited by Section 10(b) and the Elements of Rule 10b-5: Reflections on Securities Fraud and Secondary Actors, 53 CATH. U.L. REV. 667 (2004).
    3. Broady R. Hodder, Central Bank v. First Interstate Bank and Its Aftermath: Securities Professionals` Ever-Changing Liabilities, 39 ARIZ. L. REV. 343 (1997).
    4. Carl W. Mills, Breach of Fiduciary Duty as Securities Fraud: Sec v. Chancellor Corp, 10 FORDHAM J. CORP. & FIN. L. 439 (2005).
    5. Charles F. Hart, Interpreting the Heightened Pleading of the Scienter Requirement in Private Securities Fraud Litigation: The Tenth Circuit Takes the Middle Ground, 80 DENV. U.L. REV. 577 (2003).
    6. D. Joseph Meister, Securities Issuer Liability for Third Party Misstatements: Refining the Entanglement Standard, 53 VAND. L. REV. 947 (2000).
    7. Dale Arthur Oesterle, The Inexorable March Toward a Continuous Disclosure Requirement for Publicly Traded Corporations: "Are We there Yet?", 20 CARDOZO L. REV. 135 (1998).
    8. Daniel P. Collins, Summary Judgment and Circumstantial Evidence, 40 STAN. L. REV. 491 (1988).
    9. Daniel R. Fischel, Secondary Liability Under Section 10(b) of the Securities Act of 1934, 69 CAL. L. REV. 80 (1981).
    10. David B. Kramer, The Way It Is and the Way It Should Be: Liability under §10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder for Making False and Misleading Statements as Part of a Scheme to "Pump and Dump" a Stock, 13 U. MIAMI BUS. L. REV. 243 (2005).
    11. David J. Baum, The Aftermath of Central Bank of Denver: Private Aiding and Abetting Liability under Section 10(B) and Rule 10b-5, 44 AM. U.L. REV. 1817 (1995).
    12. David J. Beck, Legal Malpractice in Texas, 50 BAYLOR L. REV. 761 (1998).
    13. David Monsma & Timothy Olson, Muddling Through Counterfactual Materiality and Divergent Disclosure: The Necessary Search for a Duty to Disclose Material Non-Financial Information, 26 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 137 (2007).
    14. David S. Ruder, Multiple Defendants in Securities Law Fraud Cases: Aiding and Abetting, Conspiracy, In Pari Delicto, Indemnification, and Contribution, 120 U. PA. L. REV. 597 (1972).
    15. Deborah B. Price, Securities Regulation--Civil Liability under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5--the Scienter Requirement, 51 TUL. L. REV. 177 (1976).
    16. Dennis J. Block & Stephen A. Radin & Michael B. Carlinsky, A Post-Polaroid Snapshot of the Duty to Correct Disclosure, 1991 COLUM. BUS. L. REV. 139, 143 (1991).
    17. Donald C. Langevoort, Business Law Forum: Behavioral Analysis of Corporate Law: Instruction or Distraction?: Forum Article: Reflections on Scienter (and the Securities Fraud Case Against Martha Stewart That Never Happened), 10 LEWIS & CLARK L. REV. 1 (2006).
    18. Donald C. Langevoort, F. Hodge O`neal Corporate and Securities Law Symposium: Markets and Information Gathering in An Electronic Age: Securities Regulation in the 21st Century: Toward More Effective Risk Disclosure for Technology-Enhanced Investing, 75 WASH. U. L. Q. 753 (1997).
    19. Donald C. Langevoort, Half-Truths: Protecting Mistaken Inferences By Investors and Others, 52 STAN. L. REV. 87 (1999).
    20. Donald C. Langevoort, Words From on High About Rule 10b-5, Chiarella`s History, Central Bank`s Future, 20 DEL. J. CORP. L. 865 (1995).
    21. Donald C. Langevoort. & G. Mitu Gulati, The Muddled Duty to Disclose Under Rule 10b-5, 57 VAND. L. REV. 1639 (2004).
    22. Douglas Abrams, The Scope of Liability under Section 12 of the Securities Act of 1933: "Participation" and the Pertinent Legislative Materials, 15 FORD. URB. L.J. 877 (1987).
    23. Edmund W. Kitch, The Theory and Practice of Securities Disclosure, 61 BROOKLYN L. REV. 763 (1995).
    24. Eugene P. Caiola, Retroactive Legislative History: Scienter under the Uniform Security Litigation Standards Act of 1998, 64 ALB. L. REV. 309 (2000).
    25. Gregory S. Porter, What did You Know and When did You Know It?: Public Company Disclosure and the Mythical Duties to Correct and Update, 68 FORDHAM L. REV. 2199 (2000).
    26. Harlan S. Abrahams, Commercial Notes and Definition of "Security" Under Securities Exchange Act of 1934: A Note Is a Note Is a Note?, 52 NEB. L. REV. 478 (1973).
    27. Irving P. Seldin, When Stock Is Not a Security: The "Sale of Business" Doctrine under the Federal Securities Laws, 37 BUS. LAW 637 (1982).
    28. J. Mark Fisher, The Application of the Antifraud Provisions of the Securities Laws to Compulsory, Noncontributory Pension Plans After Daniel v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 64 VA. L. REV. 305 (1978).
    29. James L. Fuchs, A Seville Standard for Aiders and Abettors: the Logic and Implications of the Supreme Court`s Decision in Central Bank v. First Interstate Bank, 45 CASE W. RES. 661 (1995).
    30. Jill E. Fisch, The Scope of Private Securities Litigation: In Search of Liability Standards for Secondary Defendants, 99 COLUM. L. REV. 1293 (1999).
    31. Joel Seligman, The Implications of Central Bank, 49 BUS. LAW. 1429 (1994).
    32. John M. Newman Jr., Mark Herrmann & Geoffrey J. Ritts, Basic Truths: The Implications of the Fraud-on-the-Market Theory for Evaluating the "Misleading" and "Materiality" Elements of Securities Fraud Claims, 20 IOWA J. CORP. L. 571 (1995).
    33. Julia K. Cronin, Amanda R. Evansburg & Sylvia Rae Garfinkle-Huff, Securities Fraud, 38 AM. CRIM. L. REV. 1277 (2001).
    34. Kyle M. Globerman, The Elusive And Changing Definition of a Security: One Test Fits All, 51 FLA. L. REV. 271 (1999).
    35. Melissa Harrison, The Assault on the Liability of Outside Professionals: Are Lawyers and Accountants Off the Hook?, 65 U. CIN. L. REV. 473 (1997).
    36. Michael Prozan, Eliminating the Non-Trading Issuer`s Duty to Update: A Proposal to Amend 10b-5, 1990 COLUM. BUS. L. REV. 339 (1990).
    37. Nicole Miller, The Judicial Rejection of Aiding and Abetting Civil Liability under Section 10(b): Will Central Bank of Denver Spell the End of the Implied 10(B) Cause of Action?, 1995 UTAH L. REV. 913 (1995).
    38. Note, Interest in Pension Plans as Securities: Daniel v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 78 COLUM. L. REV. 184 (1978).
    39. Patricia Blanchini, The Statement Someone Else Makes May Be Your Own: Primary Liability Under Section 10(b) After Central Bank, 71 ST. JOHN`S L. REV. 767 (1997).
    40. Patrick J. Rohan, The Securities Law Implications of Condominium Marketing Programs Which Feature a Rental Agency or Rental Pool, 2 CONN. L. REV. 1 (1969).
    41. Paul Dmitri Zier, Central Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank: Pruning the Judicial Oak by Severing the Aiding and Abetting Branch, 72 DENV. U.L. REV. 191 (1994).
    42. Peter H. Huang, Moody Investing and the Supreme Court: Rethinking the Materiality of Information and the Reasonableness of Investors, 13 S. CT. ECON. REV. 99 (2005).
    43. Ralph K. Winter, Paying Lawyers, Empowering Prosecutors, and Protecting Managers: Raising the Cost of Capital in America, 42 DUKE L.J. 945 (1993).
    44. Randall W. Quinn & Paul Gonson, Securities Symposium Issue: Development of the Securities Law in the Supreme Court: The Definition of "Security" And the Implication of Private Rights of Action, 35 HOW. L.J. 319 (1992).
    45. Richard G. Himelrick, Pleading Securities Fraud, 43 MD. L. REV. 342 (1984).
    46. Richard H. Walker & David M. Levine, "You`ve Got Jail": Current Trends in Civil and Criminal Enforcement of Internet Securities Fraud, 38 AM. CRIM. L. REV. 405 (2001).
    47. Robert A. Prentice & Vernon J. Richardson & Susan Scholz, Corporate Web Site Disclosure and Rule 10b-5: An Empirical Evaluation, 36 AM. BUS. L.J. 531 (1999).
    48. Robert A. Prentice, Locating that "Indistinct" and "Virtually Nonexistent" Line Between Primary and Secondary Liability Under Section 10(b), 75 N.C. L. REV. 691 (1997).
    49. Robert B. Thompson, The Shrinking Definition of a Security: Why Purchasing All of a Company`s Stock Is Not a Federal Security Transaction, 57 N.Y.U.L. REV. 225 (1982).
    50. Robert S. De Leon, The Fault Lines Between Primary Liability and Aiding and Abetting Claims Under Rule 10b-5, 22 J. CORP. L. 723 (1997).
    51. Ronald A. Dabrowski, Proportionate Liability in 10b-5 Reckless Fraud Cases, 44 DUKE L.J. 571 (1994).
    52. Ronald J. Coffey, The Economic Realities of a "Security": Is there a More Meaningful Formula?, 18 W. RES. L. REV. 367 (1967).
    53. Russell P. Marsella, Who`s Primarily to Blame? The Quest for the Better Test of Section 10(b) Liability, 6 ROGER WILLIAMS U. L. REV. 421 (2000).
    54. Sarah Al-Moosa, Governing Insiders Going Private on Inside Informationat, 2004 COLUM. BUS. L. REV. 601 (2004).
    55. Scott H. Moss, The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act: The Scienter Debacle, 30 SETON HALL L. REV. 1279 (2000).
    56. Scott Herpich, Relying on Client-Supplied Information: An Attorney`s Liability Exposure Under Rule 10b-5, 43 KAN. L. REV. 661 (1995).
    57. Scott M. Murray, Central Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver: the Supreme Court Chops a Bough From the Judicial Oak: There is no Implied Private Remedy to Sue for Aiding and Abetting under Section 10(b) and SEC Rule 10b-5, 30 NEW ENG.L. REV. 475 (1996).
    58. Scott Siamas, Primary Securities Fraud Liability for Secondary Actors: Revisiting Central Bank of Denver in the Wake of Enron, WorldCom, and Arthur Andersen, 37 U.C. DAVIS L. REV. 895 (2004).
    59. Stephen J. Schulte, Corporate Public Disclosure: Primer for the Practitioner, 15 CARDOZO L. REV. 971 (1994).
    60. Stephen M. Bainbridge & G. Mitu Gulati, How Do Judges Maximize? (The Same Way Everybody Else Does - Boundedly): Rules of Thumb in Securities Fraud Opinions, 51 EMORY L.J. 83 (2002).
    61. William H. Kuehnle, Secondary Liability under the Federal Securities Laws--Aiding and Abetting, Controlling Person, and Agency: Common-Law Principles and the Statutory Scheme, 14 J. CORP. L. 313 (1989).

    我國文獻
    書籍
    1. 丁紹曾、黃信昌合著，債券市場理論與實務，2006.9四版。
    2. 王文宇，公司法論，元照出版，2005.8二版第一刷。
    3. 王泰銓，公司法新論，三民書局，2004.10修訂三版一刷。
    4. 王澤鑑，民法實例研習：民法總則，作者自版，1995.3出版。
    5. 王澤鑑，民法學說與判例研究(2)，作者自版，台大法學叢書（16），1994.10。
    6. 王澤鑑，民法學說與判例研究(6)，作者自版，台大法學叢書（59），1994.8八版。
    7. 王澤鑑，侵權行為法第一冊－基本理論：一般侵權行為，作者自版，1998年版。
    8. 王澤鑑，侵權行為法第二冊：特殊侵權行為，作者自版，2006.7再刷。
    9. 史尚寬，債法總論，作者自版，1990.8版。
    10. 余雪明，證券交易法，財團法人中華民國證券暨期貨市場發展基金會發行，2003.4四版。
    11. 吳庚，行政法之理論與實用，2003.10增訂八版二刷。
    12. 李存修，選擇權交易之理論與實務，財團法人中華民國證券暨期貨市場發展基金會發行，2003.12修訂3版2刷。
    13. 李榮謙、方耀，國際金融小辭典，2003.8初版。
    14. 李銘儒，選擇權小辭典，財團法人台灣金融研訓院發行，2003.01初版2刷。
    15. 林國全，證券交易法研究，元照出版公司，2000.9初版第一刷。
    16. 林國全、陳錦旋、蓋華英，證券交易法第三六條第二項第二款所定「重大性」及「事實發生日」之定義研究，台北市證券商業同業公會，1995.10.30。
    17. 柯芳枝，公司法論（下），三民書局，2003.1增訂五版一刷。
    18. 柯芳枝，公司法論（上），三民書局，2003.3增訂五版二刷。
    19. 梁宇賢，公司法論，三民書局，2004.10修訂五版二刷。
    20. 陳春山，證券交易法論，五南圖書，2004.9七版一刷。
    21. 曾宛如，證券交易法原理，作者自版，2001.12二版。
    22. 劉玉珍等，證券市場理論與實務，2005.9三版。
    23. 劉連煜，公司法理論與判決研究（一），邱淑貞發行，1997.11再版。
    24. 劉連煜，現代公司法，作者自版，2006.8初版。
    25. 劉連煜，新證券交易法實例研習，元照出版，2007.2增訂五版第1刷。
    26. 潘秀菊，公司負責人之侵權行為責任，收錄於商法裁判百選，月旦出版，1993.9初版。
    27. 鄭玉波，民法債編各論（下冊），作者自行，1995.4十六版。
    28. 賴英照，股市遊戲規則－最新證券交易法解析，作者自版，2006.2初版。
    29. 賴英照，證券交易法逐條釋義－第一冊，作者自版，1992.8第六次印刷。
    30. 賴英照，證券交易法逐條釋義－第二冊，作者自版，1992.8第六次印刷。
    31. 賴英照，證券交易法逐條釋義－第四冊，作者自行，1992.8第二次印刷。
    32. 賴英照大法官六秩華誕祝賀論文集，現代公司法制之新課題，元照出版有限公司，2005.8初版第1刷。
    33. 賴源河，實用商事法精義，五南圖書，2004.3五版四刷。
    34. 賴源河，證券法規，元照出版，2005.10二版第1刷。
    35. 賴源河，證券管理法規，糠素儀發行，2003.9修訂版。
    36. 賴源河等，新修正公司法解析，元照出版，2002.10二版二刷。
    期刊
    1. 王志誠，公司負責人對第三人之責任，法學講座第29期，2004.9，頁93-108。
    2. 王志誠，發行市場證券詐欺規範之解釋及適用，律師雜誌第297期，2004.6，頁15-31。
    3. 王麗玉，董事之民事責任，律師雜誌第305期，2005.2，頁30-42。
    4. 何曜琛，法人董事及公司負責人對第三人之侵權行為責任，華岡法粹第36期，2006.11，頁27-47。
    5. 余雪明，認識證券交易法(2)--有價證券之概念，月旦法學第16期，1996.9，頁83-86。
    6. 李欽賢，論公司負責人對第三人賠償責任之性質－評最高法院八十四年度台上字第一五三二號判決，月旦法學雜誌第68期，2001.1，頁174-182。
    7. 易明秋，論公開說明書之法規範體系，中原財經法學第13期，2004.12，頁211-262。
    8. 林仁光，論證券發行人不實揭露資訊之法律責任－兼論證券交易法修正草案第二十條，律師雜誌第297期，2004.6，頁32-47。
    9. 林國全，公司債之整體債務性，月旦法學雜誌第74期，2001.7，頁22-23。
    10. 施智謀，固網股條買賣該當何罪，法令月刊第51卷第11期，2000.11，頁16-20。
    11. 耿一馨，違反企業資訊公開規定之民事責任（下），證券管理第12卷第9期，1994.9，頁24-45。
    12. 莊永丞，證券交易法第二十條證券詐欺損害估算方法之省思，國立臺灣大學法學論叢第34卷第2期，2005.3，頁123-180。
    13. 陳春山，公司負責人違反法令之損害賠償責任，軍法專刊第33卷第6期，1987.6，頁11-17。
    14. 陳峰富，上市上櫃公司董事對於財務預測之法律責任，律師雜誌第305期，2005.2，頁43-65。
    15. 曾宛如，論證券交易法第二十條之民事責任－以主觀要件與信賴為核心，臺大法學論叢第33卷第5期，2004.9，頁51-93。
    16. 廖大穎，不實推介非上市上櫃股票之民事責任－從台灣高等法院九十年上字第九二○號與九十年上字第一二八九號判決的啟發，月旦法學雜誌第121期，2005.6，頁229-242。
    17. 戴銘昇，2006年證券交易法修正之重點評析，法令月刊第57卷第3期，2006.3，頁48-67。
    Description: 博士
    國立政治大學
    法律學研究所
    93651504
    96
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0093651504
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Law] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    65150401.pdf108KbAdobe PDF2955View/Open
    65150402.pdf148KbAdobe PDF21077View/Open
    65150403.pdf243KbAdobe PDF2891View/Open
    65150404.pdf244KbAdobe PDF21504View/Open
    65150405.pdf347KbAdobe PDF21395View/Open
    65150406.pdf1210KbAdobe PDF24859View/Open
    65150407.pdf839KbAdobe PDF28410View/Open
    65150408.pdf1047KbAdobe PDF24271View/Open
    65150409.pdf825KbAdobe PDF23020View/Open
    65150410.pdf254KbAdobe PDF21156View/Open
    65150411.pdf333KbAdobe PDF21336View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback