1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Law
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

  • No doi shows Citation Infomation
題名 證券詐欺構成要件論
The Requirements of Securities Fraud
作者 戴銘昇
Dai,Mean Sun
貢獻者 林國全
戴銘昇
Dai,Mean Sun
關鍵詞 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
日期 2007
上傳時間 19-Sep-2009 12:13:24 (UTC+8)
摘要 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.
參考文獻 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。
描述 博士
國立政治大學
法律學研究所
93651504
96
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0093651504
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 林國全zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 戴銘昇zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Dai,Mean Sunen_US
dc.creator (作者) 戴銘昇zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Dai,Mean Sunen_US
dc.date (日期) 2007en_US
dc.date.accessioned 19-Sep-2009 12:13:24 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 19-Sep-2009 12:13:24 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 19-Sep-2009 12:13:24 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0093651504en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/37128-
dc.description (描述) 博士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 法律學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 93651504zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 96zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 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。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 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.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章　緒論 8
第一節　研究主題與緣起 8
第二節　預期研究目標 11
第二章　證券詐欺之行為要件 14
第一節　引言 14
第二節　不實(虛偽或隱匿) 17
第一項　我國重要案例介紹 17
第二項　美國重要案例介紹 28
第三項　虛偽之概念 40
第四項　隱匿之概念 47
第三節　詐欺 63
第一項　我國重要案例介紹 63
第二項　美國重要案例介紹 67
第三項　詐欺之概念 72
第四節　其他足致他人誤信之行為(足致誤信) 80
第一項　「足致誤信」是否係一獨立之「行為要件」？ 80
第二項　「足致誤信」之真正的規範功能係作為證券詐欺是否成立之「判斷標準」 82
第三項　「足致誤信」要件內涵之釐清 86
第五節　有價證券之募集、發行、私募或買賣 88
第一項　我國法：證券詐欺僅限於「有價證券之募集、發行、私募或買賣」 88
第二項　美國法：「有關」要件 90
第三項　「有價證券之募集、發行、私募或買賣」概念之詮釋 113
第六節　小結 121
第三章　證券詐欺之客體要件 123
第一節　引言 123
第二節　我國證券交易法上之有價證券 125
第一項　限定列舉之有價證券 125
第二項　擬制有價證券 134
第三項　無實體有價證券 138
第三節　美國證券法規上之「證券」 139
第一項　文義解釋原則 143
第二項　實質解釋原則 145
第三項　Howey標準 149
第四項　商業或投資二分法 155
第五項　風險資本標準 159
第六項　出售事業說 162
第四節　「核定權」與「表明其權利之證書」之規範功能 166
第一項　「核定權」之規範功能 166
第二項　「表明其權利之證書」之規範功能 170
第五節　實務問題研析 172
第一項　發行之機構是否須為已設立登記或公開發行之公司？ 172
第二項　有價證券是否限於公開募集發行者？ 173
第三項　中籤通知書及繳款書是否為有價證券？ 175
第四項　股份轉讓證書或股份過戶書，是否為有價證券？ 178
第五項　建築物「持分單位」是否為證交法上有價證券？ 179
第六節　小結 181
第四章　證券詐欺之主觀要件 183
第一節　引言 183
第二節　故意責任說 185
第一項　文義解釋 185
第二項　體系解釋 186
第三項　美國法的比較觀察 194
第三節　過失責任說 209
第一項　普通過失說 210
第二項　重大過失說 212
第三項　推定過失說(民法第一八四條第二項) 214
第四項　類推適用第三二條說 221
第四節　從證券詐欺之責任性質論主觀要件 224
第一項　證券詐欺之責任性質 224
第二項　從證券詐欺之責任性質論證券詐欺之主觀要件 230
第五節　小結 236
附論：美國“recklessness”責任及認定標準之演變 238
第一項　“recklessness”責任 238
第二項　認定標準：雙面標準說 244
第三項　1995年私人證券訴訟改革法 246
第四項　1998年證券訴訟統一標準法 247
第五項　1999年Janas案(第九巡迴法院)：採“deliberate recklessness standard” 250
第六項　1999年Bryant案(第十一巡迴法院)：採折衷說 255
第七項　1999年Advanta案(第三巡迴法院)：採雙面標準說 257
第八項　評析 259
第五章　證券詐欺之主體要件 238
第一節　引言 264
第二節　美國證券詐欺幫助人(次要行為人)責任之揚棄 266
第一項　幫助人責任之承認 266
第二項　幫助責任的揚棄：Central Bank案判決 273
第三節　美國證券詐欺行為主體之判斷標準 286
第一項　明確線標準 287
第二項　實質參與標準 291
第三項　作者或共同作者標準：有無具名，不影響行為人之責任！ 296
第四節　我國證券詐欺行為主體之判斷標準 300
第一項　我國證券詐欺行為主體並不限於契約相對人 300
第二項　我國法無須區分主要或次要行為人 302
第三項　行為主體之判斷標準 305
第五節　小結 314
第六章　結論與建議 315
第一節　結論 315
第二節　建議 319
參考文獻 321		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 110792 bytes-
dc.format.extent 152182 bytes-
dc.format.extent 249590 bytes-
dc.format.extent 250796 bytes-
dc.format.extent 355559 bytes-
dc.format.extent 1239264 bytes-
dc.format.extent 859963 bytes-
dc.format.extent 1072163 bytes-
dc.format.extent 844870 bytes-
dc.format.extent 260997 bytes-
dc.format.extent 341329 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0093651504en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 證券詐欺zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 行為要件zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 客體要件zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 主觀要件zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 主體要件zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) securities frauden_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) behavior requirementen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) object requirementen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) mental requirementen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) subject requirementen_US
dc.title (題名) 證券詐欺構成要件論zh_TW
dc.title (題名) The Requirements of Securities Frauden_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 美國文獻zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 書籍(以名排序)zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 1. ARNOLD S. JACOBS, 5B LITIGATION AND PRACTICE UNDER RULE 10b-5 (rev. ed. 1993).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 2. DAVID L. RATNER, SECURITIES REGULATION IN A NUTSHELL (3d ed. West Publishing Co. 1988) (1978).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 3. 1 HAROLD S. BLOOMENTHAL, SECURITIES LAW HANDBOOK (2006 ed. Thomson West).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 4. 2 HAROLD S. BLOOMENTHAL, SECURITIES LAW HANDBOOK (2006 ed. Thomson West).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 5. LOUIS LOSS & JOEL SELIGMAN, FUNDAMENTALS OF SECURITIES REGULATION (5th ed. Aspen Publishers 2004).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 6. THOMAS L. HAZEN, THE LAW OF SECURITIES REGULATION (2d ed. 1990).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 期刊(以名排序)zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 1. Alan R. Bromberg & Lewis D. Lowenfels, Aiding and Abetting Securities Fraud: A Critical Examination, 52 ALB. L. REV. 637 (1988).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 3. Broady R. Hodder, Central Bank v. First Interstate Bank and Its Aftermath: Securities Professionals` Ever-Changing Liabilities, 39 ARIZ. L. REV. 343 (1997).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 4. Carl W. Mills, Breach of Fiduciary Duty as Securities Fraud: Sec v. Chancellor Corp, 10 FORDHAM J. CORP. & FIN. L. 439 (2005).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 6. D. Joseph Meister, Securities Issuer Liability for Third Party Misstatements: Refining the Entanglement Standard, 53 VAND. L. REV. 947 (2000).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 8. Daniel P. Collins, Summary Judgment and Circumstantial Evidence, 40 STAN. L. REV. 491 (1988).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 9. Daniel R. Fischel, Secondary Liability Under Section 10(b) of the Securities Act of 1934, 69 CAL. L. REV. 80 (1981).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 12. David J. Beck, Legal Malpractice in Texas, 50 BAYLOR L. REV. 761 (1998).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 19. Donald C. Langevoort, Half-Truths: Protecting Mistaken Inferences By Investors and Others, 52 STAN. L. REV. 87 (1999).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 21. Donald C. Langevoort. & G. Mitu Gulati, The Muddled Duty to Disclose Under Rule 10b-5, 57 VAND. L. REV. 1639 (2004).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 23. Edmund W. Kitch, The Theory and Practice of Securities Disclosure, 61 BROOKLYN L. REV. 763 (1995).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 24. Eugene P. Caiola, Retroactive Legislative History: Scienter under the Uniform Security Litigation Standards Act of 1998, 64 ALB. L. REV. 309 (2000).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 30. Jill E. Fisch, The Scope of Private Securities Litigation: In Search of Liability Standards for Secondary Defendants, 99 COLUM. L. REV. 1293 (1999).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 31. Joel Seligman, The Implications of Central Bank, 49 BUS. LAW. 1429 (1994).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 33. Julia K. Cronin, Amanda R. Evansburg & Sylvia Rae Garfinkle-Huff, Securities Fraud, 38 AM. CRIM. L. REV. 1277 (2001).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 34. Kyle M. Globerman, The Elusive And Changing Definition of a Security: One Test Fits All, 51 FLA. L. REV. 271 (1999).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 38. Note, Interest in Pension Plans as Securities: Daniel v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 78 COLUM. L. REV. 184 (1978).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 43. Ralph K. Winter, Paying Lawyers, Empowering Prosecutors, and Protecting Managers: Raising the Cost of Capital in America, 42 DUKE L.J. 945 (1993).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 45. Richard G. Himelrick, Pleading Securities Fraud, 43 MD. L. REV. 342 (1984).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 51. Ronald A. Dabrowski, Proportionate Liability in 10b-5 Reckless Fraud Cases, 44 DUKE L.J. 571 (1994).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 52. Ronald J. Coffey, The Economic Realities of a "Security": Is there a More Meaningful Formula?, 18 W. RES. L. REV. 367 (1967).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 54. Sarah Al-Moosa, Governing Insiders Going Private on Inside Informationat, 2004 COLUM. BUS. L. REV. 601 (2004).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 55. Scott H. Moss, The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act: The Scienter Debacle, 30 SETON HALL L. REV. 1279 (2000).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 56. Scott Herpich, Relying on Client-Supplied Information: An Attorney`s Liability Exposure Under Rule 10b-5, 43 KAN. L. REV. 661 (1995).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 59. Stephen J. Schulte, Corporate Public Disclosure: Primer for the Practitioner, 15 CARDOZO L. REV. 971 (1994).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 我國文獻zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 書籍zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 1. 丁紹曾、黃信昌合著，債券市場理論與實務，2006.9四版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 2. 王文宇，公司法論，元照出版，2005.8二版第一刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 3. 王泰銓，公司法新論，三民書局，2004.10修訂三版一刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 4. 王澤鑑，民法實例研習：民法總則，作者自版，1995.3出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 9. 史尚寬，債法總論，作者自版，1990.8版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 11. 吳庚，行政法之理論與實用，2003.10增訂八版二刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 13. 李榮謙、方耀，國際金融小辭典，2003.8初版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 15. 林國全，證券交易法研究，元照出版公司，2000.9初版第一刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 17. 柯芳枝，公司法論（下），三民書局，2003.1增訂五版一刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 18. 柯芳枝，公司法論（上），三民書局，2003.3增訂五版二刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 19. 梁宇賢，公司法論，三民書局，2004.10修訂五版二刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 20. 陳春山，證券交易法論，五南圖書，2004.9七版一刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 21. 曾宛如，證券交易法原理，作者自版，2001.12二版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 22. 劉玉珍等，證券市場理論與實務，2005.9三版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 23. 劉連煜，公司法理論與判決研究（一），邱淑貞發行，1997.11再版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 24. 劉連煜，現代公司法，作者自版，2006.8初版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 27. 鄭玉波，民法債編各論（下冊），作者自行，1995.4十六版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 33. 賴源河，實用商事法精義，五南圖書，2004.3五版四刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 34. 賴源河，證券法規，元照出版，2005.10二版第1刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 35. 賴源河，證券管理法規，糠素儀發行，2003.9修訂版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 36. 賴源河等，新修正公司法解析，元照出版，2002.10二版二刷。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 期刊zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 3. 王麗玉，董事之民事責任，律師雜誌第305期，2005.2，頁30-42。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 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。zh_TW