操纵证券市场罪司法适用问题研究

发布时间：2018-10-20 12:17

【摘要】：随着资本市场的深化发展,近年来证券市场中出现了一系列行为模式新颖、涉案金额特别巨大的操纵证券市场案件。但司法实践中,该类案件大多以行政处罚了事而刑事处罚较少,这一方面与行为本身具有行政违法性和刑事违法性双重属性有关,但究其根本原因在于该罪的司法适用和认定尚存在一系列疑难问题。故本文尝试通过统计2008年到2017年3月有关操纵市场的行政及刑事案件有关信息,结合分析汪健中抢帽子等典型案例,在借鉴美国、日本和我国台湾地区对操纵证券犯罪的立法及因果关系判断的基础上,解决我国操纵证券市场犯罪中行为方式界定、兜底条款适用及因果关系认定、“两法”衔接等司法适用中的疑难问题,以期为把握操纵证券市场犯罪基本司法判断规则提出个人意见,为金融管理秩序的健康有序运行提供思路和方法。正文共分为四个部分:第一部分阐述了操纵证券市场客观行为方式。对于连续交易操纵主要应把握“资源优势”的判断及对“连续买卖”和“联合买卖”的理解。对于相对委托操纵主要应关注“与他人串通”、“对证券交易价格或交易量影响的理解,把握大宗交易相对委托的性质。而对于洗售操纵应关注“实际控制的账户”(行为要件)的界定、结果要件的理解及与当日冲销行为的区分。第二部分阐述了对操纵证券市场罪中“兜底条款”的理解。当前刑法对操纵证券市场罪兜底条款的规定存在模糊之处,从某种程度上其仍保留着“口袋罪”的特征。为避免刑罚处罚范围过宽的局面,司法者在对本罪兜底条款予以理解和入罪适用时,应在罪刑法定的框架下,坚持严格解释与同类解释规则,进而结合实际明晰可能的操纵证券市场情形。建议将蛊惑交易、虚假申报、安定操作和违约交割等操纵行为纳入兜底条款适用情形予以刑法规制。第三部分阐述了操纵证券市场罪因果关系的判断。操纵证券市场行为的隐蔽性与专业性、证券交易的复杂性等因素决定本罪的操纵行为及结果事实之间存在因果关系认定难的问题。在借鉴美国的“资本市场欺诈理论”、日本的“间接反证理论”、台湾地区的推定因果关系理论的基础上,建议我国操纵证券市场犯罪因果关系判断时也采推定因果关系理论。第四部分阐述了证券市场中的操纵行为在行政处罚法与刑事法律中的衔接问题。当前操纵证券市场的司法实践中存在违法与犯罪界限不明、以罚代刑严重、行政程序与刑事诉讼程序不协调等问题。因行政违法与刑事犯罪有着不同的法律特征,故在司法判断中首先需要厘清操纵证券市场罪行政违法与刑事犯罪的区别,同时在“两法衔接”问题上,需要优化操纵证券市场罪刑罚配置,完善检察机关的法律监督机制和案件移送机制,并建立操纵证券市场案件信息共享平台。
[Abstract]:With the deepening development of capital market, in recent years, a series of new behavior patterns have emerged in the securities market, involving a huge amount of money to manipulate the securities market cases. However, in judicial practice, most of these cases have been punished by administrative punishment but less by criminal punishment, which is related to the dual attributes of administrative illegality and criminal illegality. However, the fundamental reason is that there are still a series of difficult problems in the judicial application and cognizance of the crime. Therefore, this paper attempts to use the United States for reference through statistics on administrative and criminal cases related to market manipulation from 2008 to March 2017, combined with the analysis of typical cases such as Wang Jian's snatching a hat. On the basis of legislation and causality judgment of securities manipulation crime in Japan and Taiwan, this paper resolves the definition of behavior in the crime of manipulating securities market in our country, the application of bottom clause and the determination of causality. The difficult problems in the judicial application such as the connection of "two laws" are expected to put forward personal opinions for grasping the basic judicial judgment rules of crimes committed by manipulating the securities market, and to provide ideas and methods for the healthy and orderly operation of the financial management order. The text is divided into four parts: the first part expounds the objective behavior of manipulating the securities market. The judgment of "resource advantage" and the understanding of "continuous trading" and "joint trading" should be grasped for continuous trading manipulation. For the operation of relative entrustment, we should pay attention to "colluding with others", "understanding the influence of securities trading price or trading volume, and grasping the nature of relative entrustment in bulk trading." However, the definition of "actual controlled account" (behavior element), the understanding of result elements and the distinction between washing and selling manipulation and day sterilizing behavior should be paid attention to. The second part expounds the understanding of the "bottom clause" in the crime of manipulating the securities market. At present, the provisions of the criminal law on the crime of manipulating the securities market are vague, and to some extent they still retain the characteristics of "pocket crime". In order to avoid the situation that the scope of punishment is too wide, when the judicator understands and incriminates the clause of this crime, he should insist on strict interpretation and the same interpretation rules under the framework of legally prescribed punishment for a crime. Combined with the actual situation of the possible manipulation of the securities market. It is suggested that the manipulation of demagoguery, false declaration, stable operation and delivery of breach of contract should be regulated by criminal law. The third part expounds the judgment of the causality of the crime of manipulating the securities market. The covert and professional nature of the manipulation of securities market, the complexity of securities trading and other factors determine the problem of causality between the manipulation of the crime and the result facts. On the basis of the "capital market fraud theory" of the United States, the "indirect countervailing theory" of Japan and the theory of the presumption of causality in Taiwan, it is suggested that our country should adopt the theory of presumption causality when judging the causality of crime in manipulating the securities market. The fourth part expounds the connection of manipulation in the law of administrative punishment and criminal law. In the current judicial practice of manipulating the securities market, there are some problems, such as the illegality and the crime are not clear, the penalty for punishment is serious, and the administrative procedure is not in harmony with the criminal procedure. Because of the different legal characteristics between administrative violations and criminal offences, it is necessary to clarify the differences between administrative violations and criminal crimes in the judicial judgment, and at the same time, to link up the two laws, it is necessary to clarify the differences between the administrative violations and criminal crimes in the crime of manipulating the securities market, at the same time, It is necessary to optimize the penalty allocation of the crime of manipulating the securities market, perfect the legal supervision mechanism and the case transfer mechanism of the procuratorial organs, and establish the information sharing platform of the cases of manipulating the securities market.
【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.3

【参考文献】