자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률상 불공정거래행위와 형사책임
Unfair Trading Practices Concerning Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act and Criminal Liability
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Unfair trading practices related to securities transaction are being regulated by the Capital Market Act, Chapter 4, under the title of ‘restriction on unfair trade’, categorized into three types of insider transaction, market- making, and dishonest transactions. Unfair trading practices damage fairness and transparency in contracting, and deepen distrust of capital market. They are consistently occurring, and their occurrence types are diversified. Accordingly, legislators have regulated a heavy punishment on them regarding them as a serious crime, yet with regard to its enforcement, no acceptable outcome has been made. The reasons for this problem can be found not only in the court's mild weighing of an offense, but also in the procedures of investigating a case of unfair trading practices. The current investigation system is complex and has the structure where a prosecution is brought only through duplicate processes. As for the structurally problematic investigation procedure, it's most appropriate to form a consultative group combining one integrated deliberation agency and the prosecution as an investigative agency. In addition, the effectiveness of criminal sanction on unfair trading practices lies in protecting investors participating in a stock market for the purpose of investment through the laws about punishment according to the capital market law, and in judging whether it plays the role of defending the society from crimes or not. To achieve these goals, stronger punishment than the current statutory penalty is being demanded, and as legislative decision corresponding to this, heavy penalty system is being pursued. However, serious criminal punishment is not necessarily effective to suppress crimes. Rather, defining proper penalty for each type of crimes and imposing it clearly will be effective prevention and retribution. For this, the punishment regulations of the capital market law need changes. In other words, they must be revised so that the gain or evaded amount of money from violation may be regarded as the components of a crime and the elements for the assessment of a case, rather than the same kind of crimes are punished differentially depending on the amount of money related to a crime.
Abstract
Unfair trading practices related to securities transaction are being regulated by the Capital Market Act, Chapter 4, under the title of ‘restriction on unfair trade’, categorized into three types of insider transaction, market- making, and dishonest transactions. Unfair trading practices damage fairness and transparency in contracting, and deepen distrust of capital market. They are consistently occurring, and their occurrence types are diversified. Accordingly, legislators have regulated a heavy punishment on them regarding them as a serious crime, yet with regard to its enforcement, no acceptable outcome has been made. The reasons for this problem can be found not only in the court's mild weighing of an offense, but also in the procedures of investigating a case of unfair trading practices. The current investigation system is complex and has the structure where a prosecution is brought only through duplicate processes. As for the structurally problematic investigation procedure, it's most appropriate to form a consultative group combining one integrated deliberation agency and the prosecution as an investigative agency. In addition, the effectiveness of criminal sanction on unfair trading practices lies in protecting investors participating in a stock market for the purpose of investment through the laws about punishment according to the capital market law, and in judging whether it plays the role of defending the society from crimes or not. To achieve these goals, stronger punishment than the current statutory penalty is being demanded, and as legislative decision corresponding to this, heavy penalty system is being pursued. However, serious criminal punishment is not necessarily effective to suppress crimes. Rather, defining proper penalty for each type of crimes and imposing it clearly will be effective prevention and retribution. For this, the punishment regulations of the capital market law need changes. In other words, they must be revised so that the gain or evaded amount of money from violation may be regarded as the components of a crime and the elements for the assessment of a case, rather than the same kind of crimes are punished differentially depending on the amount of money related to a crime.
참고문헌 (44)
- 김건식, "자본시장법" (2010), 두성사
- 김성준, "증권형사법" (2007), 산경
- 김정수, "자본시장법원론" (2011), 서울파인낸스앤로그룹
- 신영무, "증권거래법" (1987), 서울대학교출판부
- 이상돈, "증권형법" (2010), 법문사
- 이상복, "자본시장법상 내부자거래" (2010), 박영사
- 이준섭, "EU 은행․증권법" (1996), 박영사
- 임재연, "자본시장법" (2012), 박영사
- 장근영, "자본시장법 주석서" (2009), 박영사
- 허일태, "형법연구. 4" (2009), 동아대학교 출판부
- Tiedemann, Klaus, "Wirtschaftsbetru" (1999), Walter de Gruyter
- 구승모, "자본시장법상 불공정거래행위 수사 현황 및 개선방안- 불공정거래행위에 대한 과징금 도입논의와 관련하여 -", 법조, 61(7), pp.54~109 (2012), 법조협회[DOI]
- 형사특별법 정비방안(10)보건, 의료 마약, 생명, 윤리 분야, "권수진", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (2008)
- 금융감독원, "2012년 불공정거래 조사결과 및 특징 보도자료", ~ (2013)
- 자본시장법상 형사제재의 한계와 개선방안에 관한 연구, "김대근", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (2011)
- 김병태, "시세조종 관련 부당이득에 대한 연구", 인권과 정의, (382), pp.78~100 (2008), 대한변호사협회
- 김택주, "시세조종행위에 따른 손해배상책임", 상사판례연구, 18(2), pp.241~269 (2005), 한국상사판례학회
- 김희수, "특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률 개폐론", 비교형사법연구, 9(1), pp.283~306 (2007), 한국비교형사법학회
- 박성민, "특경법 제3조 제1항의 사기죄에 있어 이득액의 의미와 기준 - 대판 2007. 4. 19, 2005도7288 전원합의체 판결 -", 성균관법학, 21(1), pp.189~207 (2009), 법학연구소
- 박승배, "자본시장법상 불공정거래규제에서의 인과관계", 제160회 정기세미나 (2010), 한국증권법학회
- 배종혁, "자본시장 불공정거래 행위에 대한 수사 시스템의 문제점과 개선방안", 자본시장 불공정거래행위에 대한 효율적 규제방안 모색을 위한 심포지엄 발표문 (2010)
- 선종수, "시세조종행위에 대한 형법적 고찰", 박사, 법학과, pp.2012
- 선종수, "증권범죄 수사의 효율성 확보방안", 동아법학, (54), pp.485~516 (2012), 법학연구소
- 선종수, "특별법상 ‘범죄의 가액’에 따른 차등처벌에 대한 비판적 검토", 학문후속세대 동계학술대회 (2013), 동아대학교 법학연구소
- 성희활, "자본시장 불공정거래 행위에 대한 수사 시스템의 문제점과 개선방안", 자본시장 불공정거래행위에 대한 효율적 규제방안 모색을 위한 심포지엄 토론문 (2010)
- 형사특별법 정비방안(4)특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률, "손동권", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (2008)
- 안경옥, "특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률의 정비방안", 형사정책, 17(2), pp.9~32 (2005), 한국형사정책학회
- 안수현, "불공정거래행위 규제법의 새로운 전개-자본시장 및 금융투자업에 관한 법률(안)의 불공정거래행위 규제를 중심으로-", BFL, (22) (2007), 서울대학교 금융법센터
- 오영근, "특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률 폐지의 당위성", 형사정책, 17(2), pp.33~53 (2005), 한국형사정책학회
- 형사특별법의 제정실태와 개선방안, "오영근", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (1995)
- 윤승은, "특정범죄가중처벌 등에 관한 법률적용상의 몇 가지 문제점과 대안", 형사법연구, (26), pp.109~138 (2006), 한국형사법학회
- 이기헌, "동종의 범죄를 가액에 따라 차등처벌하는 특별규정", 형사판례연구, 3 (1995)
- 이상원, "횡령죄의 이득액과 가벌적 후행행위 <상>", 저스티스, (131), pp.173~201 (2012), 한국법학원[DOI]
- 형사입법자의 형벌법규 제정권한의 한계에 관한 연구, "이진국", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (2003)
- 임웅, "경제범죄에 대한 형법적 대책-그 입문적 고찰-", 성균관법학, (창간) (1987), 성균관대학교 비교법연구소
- 임채웅, "주가조작 관련 범죄에 관한 법리의 연구", 인권과 정의, (343), pp.73~96 (2005), 대한변호사협회
- 시세조종행위의 형법적 문제에 관한 연구, "임철희", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (2002)
- 형사특별법 정비방안(3) 특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률, "전지연", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (2008)
- 정순섭, "자본시장법상 불공정거래와 보호법익 – 시세조종과 부당이득을 중심으로 -", 상사판례연구, 25(1), pp.113~167 (2012), 한국상사판례학회[DOI]
- 조재연, "자본시장법 제443조에서의 '내부자거래규제 위반행위로 얻은 이익 또는 회피한 손실액' 산정방법에 대한 小考", 한양법학, (32), pp.339~356 (2010), 한양법학회
- 최호진, "형가중적 형사특별법에 대한 법이론적 문제점", 법학논총, 30(1) (2006), 단국대학교법학연구소
- 추원식, "자본시장 불공정거래 행위에 대한 수사 시스템의 문제점과 개선방안", 자본시장 불공정거래행위에 대한 효율적 규제방안 모색을 위한 심포지엄 토론문 (2010)
- 한상훈, "형법 및 형사특별법상 재산범죄 가중처벌규정의 문제점과 개선방안", 형사법연구, (26), pp.139~168 (2006), 한국형사법학회
- 황종국, "범죄의 액수에 따라 가중처벌하는 특별법의 해석에 관한 문제, In 재판자료 제50집" (1990)