关于完善对网络银行风险监管问题的思考

发布时间：2018-02-21 04:53

本文关键词： 关于完善网络银行风险监管题的思考　出处：《吉林财经大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：本文将基于一个简单的三段论逻辑结构形式，即是什么、怎么了、怎么，对自己的观点进行阐述。文章的第一部分是概述，也就是说明网络银行的风险监管“是什么”的部分。在这部分，笔者将简单介绍一下网络银行的发展现状、运行特点及趋势、网络银行运行中产生的问题，通过对网络银行运行现状的简要分析，重点引出网络银行风险监管的概念、内容、种类，为下文的写作打下基础。文章的第二部分是对网络银行的各种风险进行分析，也就是诠释“怎么了”的部分。在这部分，笔者将对各种风险进行简要的阐释，并从技术层面、制度层面、监管层面，对各种风险进行深层次的剖析。技术层面的风险并不需要笔者从法学层面进行深入分析，因此在文章的写作方面笔者除了将其简单定义外，并不赘述，将一笔带过。制度层面的风险笔者将通过经济学、法学理论进行深层次解析。制度性风险主要集中于由网络银行内部体制造成的操作不规范引发的风险和由网络银行和其用户双方责任归属不明确引发的风险。对监管层面的风险分析，主要从两点出发，一是对现行监管体制、监管机构职能进行分析、总结指出问题所在。二是对监管理念的诠释，从监督管理为主的理念向服务型理念的转变。文章的第三部分是提出自己在网络银行风险监管中的意见建议，也就是“怎么办”的部分。结合上面的分析，分别对国内外的银行监管制度进行介绍，如美国对网络银行的监管、欧洲国家对网络银行的监管等。重点介绍了被普遍认同的巴塞尔体制，并对在其体制下的法律监管从监管理念、监管模式、具体的监管方式等，并在此基础上，针对文章第二部分提出的三种层次的风险逐一解决。技术层面的风险的主要问题在于监管制度及其监管标准的具体化，即为网络银行安全技术提供具体的可供参考的标准，同时网络银行技术性风险的规则原则。解决制度层面的风险主要在于1、建立统一的网络银行业务监管体系；2、为网络银行日益国际化的发展趋势作出调整；3、规范网络银行“协议”，详尽双方的权利义务，即明确在合同订立时，双方应有的或不应有的约定。监管层面的风险在于监管机构对这些信息进行认证的过程中应如何公布信息、公布的程度和方式如何等。笔者的理论基点在于对于法律的连续性、稳定性理解，如果能通过对现行的法律进行解释来解决问题，并不建议重新立法或者专门立法。另一方面给是通过经济学的相关理论对交易达成或者说是合同订制的各环节银行、客户各自掌握的信息量进行分析。笔者的理论基点是任何一个双赢合同的达成都是订立合同的双方掌握信息量的相对平衡，虽然市场行为处处博弈，但一旦合同双方掌握的信息失衡，则很容易造成重大误解或者欺诈，致使合同无法订立，，使双方“共损”。最后结语部分将对文章的观点进行总结。
[Abstract]:This article will be based on a simple syllogism logical structure, that is, what, how, and how, to explain to your own point of view.
The first part is an overview, which means that the network bank risk supervision "is what" part. In this part, the author will introduce the current situation of the development of the network bank, the trends and characteristics of operation, network bank problems in operation, through a brief analysis of the operation of the network status of the bank, the concept, key leads the network bank risk supervision content, types, lay the foundation for the following writing.
The second part of the article is to analyze the various risks of Internet banking, is also the interpretation of "what" part. In this part, the author will give a brief explanation of the various risks, and from the technical level, system level, supervision level, to analyze the various risks.
The technical level of risk does not require the thorough analysis from the view of law, so the author in writing in addition to the simple definition, do not say, will be passing. The author will use the risk level of system economics, legal theory in-depth analysis. The institutional risk is mainly caused by the internal network system banks do not regulate the operation risk and by the network bank and its users the responsibility of ownership is not clear the risk.
The risk analysis at the regulatory level mainly starts from two points. First, it analyzes the current regulatory system and regulatory functions, summarizes the problems. Two, it interprets the concept of supervision, from the concept of supervision and management to the transformation of service concept.
The third part of the article puts forward his own suggestions on the network bank risk supervision opinions, that is "how to do" part. According to the above analysis, are introduced respectively in the domestic and foreign banking supervision system, such as the United States on the supervision of network bank, the European countries on the supervision of network bank. Emphasis is generally the identity of the Basel system, and the legal supervision in the system from the regulatory philosophy, regulatory mode, specific supervision mode, and on this basis, the risk of three levels proposed in the second part of the main problems solved one by one. The technical level of risk lies in the specific regulatory system and regulatory standards, i.e. provide reference standard for the specific network bank security technology, and technology of network banking rules. To solve the institutional risk level mainly lies in the 1, the establishment of a unified network The regulatory system of Internet banking business; 2, adjusted for the development trend of Internet banking internationalization; 3, standard network bank "agreement", detailed the rights and obligations of both parties, that is clear in the contract, the two sides should or should not have agreed. Risk supervision level is how to publish the information process of regulators for certification the information in the manner and degree of published. How is that for the theoretical basis of continuity, the stability of the law, if to solve the problem based on the explanation of the current law does not suggest new legislation or legislation. On the other hand is to through the theory of economics to deal or that is customized for each part of the contract bank, analyze customer information in their possession. The theoretical basis is to reach a win-win situation any contract is the contract The two sides grasp the relative balance of information volume. Although the market behavior is everywhere, once the information imbalance between the two parties is mastered, it is easy to cause significant misunderstanding or fraud, resulting in the contract can not be concluded, so that both parties can "lose together".
The last part of the conclusion will summarize the views of the article.

【学位授予单位】：吉林财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D996

【共引文献】