Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author肖伟
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-26T07:00:44Z
dc.date.available2018-11-26T07:00:44Z
dc.date.issued2016-03-15
dc.identifier.citation财经法学,2016,(02):96-101,130
dc.identifier.issn2095-9206
dc.identifier.otherCJFX201602009
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.xmu.edu.cn/handle/2288/161718
dc.description.abstract我国对建议型内幕交易的行政责任和刑事责任的法律规定存在着明显不协调的现象。前者将其作为独立的一种行为样态,而后者却没有规定相关的罪名。域外法律对此主要有两种做法。欧盟、我国香港地区、韩国等国家和地区的法律将建议型内幕交易行为单列为一种独立的内幕交易行为样态,但美国、日本、我国台湾地区等国家和地区的法律却未规定该种内幕交易行为样态。我国香港地区法律以建议行为引起了相关交易作为建议型内幕交易的构成要件,而欧盟、韩国法律规定只要发生建议行为,不论其是否引起相关交易行为,均可构成内幕交易。我国应当借鉴欧盟等法域的做法,将建议行为单独作为一种内幕交易行为类型,不必以建议行为引起他人从事证券交易为构成要件,但应以被建议人知道或者应当知道建议人系根据内幕信息向其提出买卖证券建议为要件。另外,应将建议行为纳入刑法规制,将现有刑法第180条第1款"明示、暗示他人从事上述交易活动"修改为"以明示、暗示的方式建议他人从事上述交易活动"。
dc.description.abstractAs for insider trading of advisement type,there is striking discord between the legal provisions of administrative liabilities and those of criminal liabilities.China should make advisement type as an independent type of insider trading.It is not necessary to take leading the advised into conducting corresponding transactions as one of the constitutive requirements of insider trading of advisement type,whereas it is essential to take that the advised knows or should know the adviser gives him the suggestion based on insider information as such.Advisement act should be governed by criminal law.The provision of Section 1of Article 180 of China's Criminal Law,which is"to express or imply the others to conduct the above transactions"could be revised as"advise the others to conduct the above transactions in express or implied ways".
dc.language.isozh_CN
dc.subject内幕交易
dc.subject建议型内幕交易
dc.subject内幕交易罪
dc.subjectInsider trading
dc.subjectInsider trading of advisement type
dc.subjectInsider trading crime
dc.title论建议型内幕交易
dc.title.alternativeResearch on Insider Trading of Advisement Type
dc.typeArticle


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record