國立高雄大學圖資館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

圖資館首頁

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

公司財務資訊不實之損害賠償責任研究-以損害賠償責任及範圍為中心 = Ci...

國立高雄大學法律學系碩士班

公司財務資訊不實之損害賠償責任研究-以損害賠償責任及範圍為中心 = Civil Injury Liabilities of compensation for Financial Statement Fraud

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : 單行本
並列題名:	Civil Injury Liabilities of compensation for Financial Statement Fraud
作者:	李顒任,
其他團體作者:	國立高雄大學
出版地:	[高雄市]
出版者:	撰者;
出版年:	民100
面頁冊數:	231面圖，表格 : 30公分;
標題:	證交法第二十條
標題:	disclosure
電子資源:	http://handle.ncl.edu.tw/11296/ndltd/65570209123615644092
附註:	參考書目：面197-201
摘要註:	在現代資本主義經濟社會中，工商業越發達，經營企業所需資金日益龐大，造成股份有限公司之多數股東並未實際參予公司之經營與管理，僅仰賴少數企業經營者及其所公開揭露的資訊作為判斷依據。由於投資人於購買股票時，無法單憑股票之外觀來決定其是否有投資之價值，故舉凡公司過去之績效、公司之資產負債、公司發展之前景、公司總體經濟概況，個股過去某一時段之走勢等資訊，均會影響投資人之投資決策。因此，企業經營者唯有將己身對企業獲利、公司經營、財務狀況等資料公開，投資人於閱讀相關資料後，基於自身財經素養及判斷，規劃證券投資策略。而真實揭露之財務報告乃為提供投資人對於公司與投資準據之重要資訊，公司經營者對於揭露於眾的財務報告與財務業務文件，負有忠實呈現公司財務營運及發展之責，一旦有虛偽或隱匿之情狀，勢必致使投資人為錯誤判斷，將嚴重影響整體投資市場的穩定與公平，甚至造成許多投資人血本無歸。故提供一自由、公平的證券交易市場，乃維護自由經濟，鼓勵投資之基本要件。此乃證券本身並無實質之經濟價值，證券之價值不能以其面額決定，而需以發行公司之財務、業務狀況及其他因素為依歸之特性使然。當證交法中保護投資人之重大方法—「公開原則」，未能受到確實維護時，由於投資人於投資市場往往受限於其財經專業不足及資料紛亂恐使其地位更趨於弱勢。而我國證交法中對於「揭露不實財務資訊」雖設有民事、刑事與行政責任，然對於投資人而言，最直接且能填補損失者，則非民事責任莫屬。從我國證券管理以往偏重行政監督與刑事責任，對於民事賠償問題與相關法律規範較為輕忽的情形看來，受有損害之投資人經常求償無門，以致法律功能不彰，等同於變相鼓勵不法份子鋌而走險。此外，被害投資人多屬散戶，既欠缺專業財經背景以作精準投資判斷，亦無力獨自進行司法訴訟，以獲得有效賠償，因而對市場失去信心，進而選擇退出證券交易市場。對此，本文希望藉由深入探討，瞭解相關法律問題，也企圖釐清投資人於不實資訊揭露受有損害，其得以請求賠償的對象與範圍為何，是所有不法行為之人，抑或另有特殊規定？投資人對於其權利損失有何救濟管道？此外，不法行為之責任主體是否有所爭議，投資人對於作出不實財務書類之人，其舉證責任是否一致，或因對方身份為發行人、總經理、職員、會計師等不同身份而有所區隔？證券詐欺案件中侵權行為之舉證是否雷同於傳統民法侵權行為賠償制度，由受害人對於不法行為、損害之發生、權利之損害、行為人之故意或過失、及損害因果關係負擔全部之舉證責任？我國法院多引用詐欺市場理論以決定交易因果關係，並採取毛損益法計算損害範圍。然而法院應該釐清損失因果關係與交易因果關係之區隔，及詐欺市場理論之理論基礎，以決定原告的請求賠償範圍。本文將藉由探討證交法之立法目的及各國相關規定，並輔以我國法院實務判決研究，以檢視目前法院見解是否妥適。最後，根據各章節探討結果，總結證券詐欺之民事責任，及對可能發生的問題提出建議與修法方向。 In the modern capitalism society, it needs more funds to operate a company, day by day .Due to the most stockholders of the limited liability company won’t participate in the company management, and they often make decisions depend on few operators and public financial statements. When the investors purchase the stocks of the limited liability company, they couldn’t decide how the value of the stocks is by their appearances. There are many factors that will affect the investment strategies, including the past achievements, property and debt, the prospect of the company, the business conditions, etc. Therefore, the investors will make suitable decisions only when the operators announce all of the public financial statements. When ‘disclosure’ of Securities and Exchange Act, that is regard as a important rule, doesn’t actually be protected, the stockholders will become disadvantage. It establishes civil compensation, criminal responsibility and administrative responsibility about people who appear misrepresentation in Securities and Exchange Act, but only criminal responsibility can fill the loss of investors. Our Securities and Exchange manage pay much attention to criminal responsibility and administrative responsibility, but neglect Civil Injury Liabilities of compensation. Therefore, the investors often couldn’t get back their loss, it causes the Securities and Exchange Act disabled and more securities fraud cases. While the situations grow worse, some investors will withdraw from the securities exchange market. This dissertation attempt to discuss that whom and how much could the investors request when the cases of financial statement fraud happen? How could they request compensation？Do people dispute the main body of securities fraud? Do the investors have the same burden of proof to each person who appears misrepresentation? How to measure and calculate damages? Our court quotes ‘Fraud-on-the-market Theory’ to decide the transaction causation, and decides the range of the loss by ‘gross income loss’. But the courts should distinguish transaction causation from loss causation, and the foundation for applying the fraud-on-the-market theory to deiced the loss that the plaintiff could request. Therefore, this dissertation confers the legislative goals of the Securities and Exchange Act, the acts of other countries, and the judgments in our courts to view how the points of view are. Finally, conclude the civil responsibilities of financial fraud according to the description in the abovementioned chapters, and suggest the amendment of laws based on the problems which possibly appeared.

公司財務資訊不實之損害賠償責任研究-以損害賠償責任及範圍為中心 = Civil Injury Liabilities of compensation for Financial Statement Fraud
李, 顒任

公司財務資訊不實之損害賠償責任研究-以損害賠償責任及範圍為中心 = Civil Injury Liabilities of compensation for Financial Statement Fraud / 李顒任撰 - [高雄市] : 撰者, 民100. - 231面 ; 圖，表格 ; 30公分.
參考書目：面197-201.
證交法第二十條disclosure

公司財務資訊不實之損害賠償責任研究-以損害賠償責任及範圍為中心 = Civil Injury Liabilities of compensation for Financial Statement Fraud
LDR:07758nam0a2200277 450 001 300316
005 20170214090616.0
009 300316
010 0 $b 精裝
010 0 $b 平裝
100 $a 20170214y2011 m y0chiy50 e
101 1 $a chi $d chi $d eng
102 $a tw
105 $a ak am 000yy
200 1 $a 公司財務資訊不實之損害賠償責任研究-以損害賠償責任及範圍為中心 $d Civil Injury Liabilities of compensation for Financial Statement Fraud $z eng $f 李顒任撰
210 $a [高雄市] $c 撰者 $d 民100
215 0 $a 231面 $c 圖，表格 $d 30公分
300 $a 參考書目：面197-201
314 $a 指導教授：姚志明博士
328 $a 碩士論文--國立高雄大學法律學系碩士班
330 $a 在現代資本主義經濟社會中，工商業越發達，經營企業所需資金日益龐大，造成股份有限公司之多數股東並未實際參予公司之經營與管理，僅仰賴少數企業經營者及其所公開揭露的資訊作為判斷依據。由於投資人於購買股票時，無法單憑股票之外觀來決定其是否有投資之價值，故舉凡公司過去之績效、公司之資產負債、公司發展之前景、公司總體經濟概況，個股過去某一時段之走勢等資訊，均會影響投資人之投資決策。因此，企業經營者唯有將己身對企業獲利、公司經營、財務狀況等資料公開，投資人於閱讀相關資料後，基於自身財經素養及判斷，規劃證券投資策略。而真實揭露之財務報告乃為提供投資人對於公司與投資準據之重要資訊，公司經營者對於揭露於眾的財務報告與財務業務文件，負有忠實呈現公司財務營運及發展之責，一旦有虛偽或隱匿之情狀，勢必致使投資人為錯誤判斷，將嚴重影響整體投資市場的穩定與公平，甚至造成許多投資人血本無歸。故提供一自由、公平的證券交易市場，乃維護自由經濟，鼓勵投資之基本要件。此乃證券本身並無實質之經濟價值，證券之價值不能以其面額決定，而需以發行公司之財務、業務狀況及其他因素為依歸之特性使然。當證交法中保護投資人之重大方法—「公開原則」，未能受到確實維護時，由於投資人於投資市場往往受限於其財經專業不足及資料紛亂恐使其地位更趨於弱勢。而我國證交法中對於「揭露不實財務資訊」雖設有民事、刑事與行政責任，然對於投資人而言，最直接且能填補損失者，則非民事責任莫屬。從我國證券管理以往偏重行政監督與刑事責任，對於民事賠償問題與相關法律規範較為輕忽的情形看來，受有損害之投資人經常求償無門，以致法律功能不彰，等同於變相鼓勵不法份子鋌而走險。此外，被害投資人多屬散戶，既欠缺專業財經背景以作精準投資判斷，亦無力獨自進行司法訴訟，以獲得有效賠償，因而對市場失去信心，進而選擇退出證券交易市場。對此，本文希望藉由深入探討，瞭解相關法律問題，也企圖釐清投資人於不實資訊揭露受有損害，其得以請求賠償的對象與範圍為何，是所有不法行為之人，抑或另有特殊規定？投資人對於其權利損失有何救濟管道？此外，不法行為之責任主體是否有所爭議，投資人對於作出不實財務書類之人，其舉證責任是否一致，或因對方身份為發行人、總經理、職員、會計師等不同身份而有所區隔？證券詐欺案件中侵權行為之舉證是否雷同於傳統民法侵權行為賠償制度，由受害人對於不法行為、損害之發生、權利之損害、行為人之故意或過失、及損害因果關係負擔全部之舉證責任？我國法院多引用詐欺市場理論以決定交易因果關係，並採取毛損益法計算損害範圍。然而法院應該釐清損失因果關係與交易因果關係之區隔，及詐欺市場理論之理論基礎，以決定原告的請求賠償範圍。本文將藉由探討證交法之立法目的及各國相關規定，並輔以我國法院實務判決研究，以檢視目前法院見解是否妥適。最後，根據各章節探討結果，總結證券詐欺之民事責任，及對可能發生的問題提出建議與修法方向。 In the modern capitalism society, it needs more funds to operate a company, day by day .Due to the most stockholders of the limited liability company won’t participate in the company management, and they often make decisions depend on few operators and public financial statements. When the investors purchase the stocks of the limited liability company, they couldn’t decide how the value of the stocks is by their appearances. There are many factors that will affect the investment strategies, including the past achievements, property and debt, the prospect of the company, the business conditions, etc. Therefore, the investors will make suitable decisions only when the operators announce all of the public financial statements. When ‘disclosure’ of Securities and Exchange Act, that is regard as a important rule, doesn’t actually be protected, the stockholders will become disadvantage. It establishes civil compensation, criminal responsibility and administrative responsibility about people who appear misrepresentation in Securities and Exchange Act, but only criminal responsibility can fill the loss of investors. Our Securities and Exchange manage pay much attention to criminal responsibility and administrative responsibility, but neglect Civil Injury Liabilities of compensation. Therefore, the investors often couldn’t get back their loss, it causes the Securities and Exchange Act disabled and more securities fraud cases. While the situations grow worse, some investors will withdraw from the securities exchange market. This dissertation attempt to discuss that whom and how much could the investors request when the cases of financial statement fraud happen? How could they request compensation？Do people dispute the main body of securities fraud? Do the investors have the same burden of proof to each person who appears misrepresentation? How to measure and calculate damages? Our court quotes ‘Fraud-on-the-market Theory’ to decide the transaction causation, and decides the range of the loss by ‘gross income loss’. But the courts should distinguish transaction causation from loss causation, and the foundation for applying the fraud-on-the-market theory to deiced the loss that the plaintiff could request. Therefore, this dissertation confers the legislative goals of the Securities and Exchange Act, the acts of other countries, and the judgments in our courts to view how the points of view are. Finally, conclude the civil responsibilities of financial fraud according to the description in the abovementioned chapters, and suggest the amendment of laws based on the problems which possibly appeared.
510 1 $a Civil Injury Liabilities of compensation for Financial Statement Fraud $z eng
610 0 $a 證交法第二十條 $a 證交法第二十條之一 $a 證交法第三十六條 $a 不實資訊 $a 不實揭露 $a 證券詐欺 $a 損害賠償 $a 交易因果關係 $a 損害因果關係 $a 詐欺市場理論 $a 股份有限公司 $a 團體訴訟 $a 毛損益法 $a 淨值差額法
610 1 $a disclosure $a securities fraud $a transaction causation $a loss causation $a Fraud-on-the-market Theory $a class action $a gross income loss $a out-of-pocket method $a ecurities Exchange Act of Clause 20-1
681 $a 008M/0019 $b 380101 4062 $v 2007年版
700 1 $a 李 $b 顒任 $4 撰 $3 518725
712 0 2 $a 國立高雄大學 $b 法律學系碩士班 $3 166036
801 0 $a tw $b NUK $c 20111020 $g CCR
856 7 $z 電子資源 $2 http $u http://handle.ncl.edu.tw/11296/ndltd/65570209123615644092