本文選題：老鼠倉 + 利用未公開信息交易罪��； 參考：《華東政法大學》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：“老鼠倉”行為是金融交易領域非常常見的一種違規(guī)交易行為，幾乎成為業(yè)內人盡皆知的“潛規(guī)則”，其數(shù)量之大讓人驚訝。它不僅嚴重損害了廣大散戶的利益，給股民帶來巨額財產損失，更嚴重挫敗了人們的投資信心，阻礙了我國金融業(yè)的健康有序發(fā)展，可以說“鼠患不除，金融不興”。 雖然我國刑法已將“老鼠倉”行為納入到刑法規(guī)制范圍之內，但是不得不承認在處理“老鼠倉”犯罪案件時確實存在很多疑難問題，概念不清、界限模糊、偵查難、取證難、司法實效難以達到立法預期等問題突出。因此，有必要對“老鼠倉”行為的刑法規(guī)制進行深入的研究，既包括立法層面研究，也包括司法層面的研究。 文章的主體內容主要有四個章節(jié)，各部分具體內容如下： 第一章主要從三個方面對“老鼠倉”的本體問題進行了研究，首先介紹了“老鼠倉”行為是什么，通過對“老鼠倉”概念的溯源，揭示出其“先進、先溜”的違規(guī)交易本質。其次，通過對我國司法實踐中“唐建案”的具體運作流程進行剖析，并結合圖表的形式將“老鼠倉”運作流程直觀地表現(xiàn)出來。最后，通過對“老鼠倉”行為方式和主體關系的分析，得出“老鼠倉”行為本質上是背信行為的結論。 第二章主要是通過對比研究的方法，分析我國對“老鼠倉”規(guī)制路徑選擇的應然與實然。英美立法模式固然可以通過內幕交易罪的形式將“老鼠倉”行為納入其中，但因基金形式不同借鑒意義不大；日本以背信罪和特殊背信罪相結合的立法模式為我們解決“老鼠倉”犯罪問題提供了一種新的思路，但是也存在口袋罪的問題；德國和我國臺灣地區(qū)的立法模式將“老鼠倉”行為進行了細致、全面的區(qū)分，有效地避免了法律黑洞的出現(xiàn)，值得我們借鑒。文章通過對我國立法模式的分析，得出設立金融從業(yè)人員背信罪才是可行之策的結論。 第三章主要是從犯罪構成要件的角度，對利用未公開信息交易罪進行分析。選擇“未公開信息”、“利用因職務便利”、“違規(guī)規(guī)定”和“明示、暗示他人從事相關交易”作為本罪的客觀要件研究的切入點。從本罪主體范圍的框定和共犯問題的角度全面分析本罪的主體。最后結合實踐中出現(xiàn)的問題，，有針對性地提出增設單位犯罪和修正“情節(jié)嚴重”之規(guī)定的建言。 第四章是對“老鼠倉”犯罪司法實效的考量，主要對利用未公開信息交易罪司法實效不佳的原因進行分析，并從偵查、銜接機制以及法定刑方面對提高“老鼠倉”犯罪的司法實效提出完善建議。
[Abstract]:Rat trading is a very common form of illegal trading in financial trading, and it has become a well-known "hidden rule" in the industry, and its number is surprisingly large. It not only seriously damages the interests of the majority of retail investors, brings huge property losses to the shareholders, but also seriously thwarts people's investment confidence and hinders the healthy and orderly development of our financial industry. Although the criminal law of our country has brought the "rat warehouse" behavior into the scope of the criminal law, it has to be admitted that there are many difficult problems in dealing with the "mouse storehouse" crime cases, the concept is not clear, the boundaries are blurred, the investigation is difficult, the evidence collection is difficult. Judicial effectiveness is difficult to achieve legislative expectations and other outstanding problems. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a deep study on the criminal law regulation of "rat storehouse", including both legislative and judicial aspects. The main body of the article has four chapters, and the specific contents of each part are as follows: The first chapter mainly studies the ontology of "mouse bin" from three aspects. Firstly, it introduces what the behavior of "mouse bin" is, and reveals the essence of "advanced, advance" illegal trading by tracing the source of the concept of "mouse bin". Secondly, through the analysis of the concrete operation process of "Tang Jian case" in the judicial practice of our country, and combined with the form of chart, the operation process of "mouse storehouse" is displayed intuitively. Finally, through the analysis of the behavior pattern and the main body relationship of "mouse bin", it is concluded that the behavior of "mouse bin" is essentially a breach of trust behavior. The second chapter mainly through the contrast research method, analyzes our country to the "mouse storehouse" the regulation path choice should and the reality. Although the Anglo-American legislative model can include the "rat warehouse" behavior in the form of insider trading crime, it is of little significance for reference because of the different forms of funds. Japan's legislative model of combining the crime of breach of trust with the crime of special breach of trust provides us with a new way of thinking to solve the problem of "rat bin" crime, but there is also the problem of pocket crime. The legislative model of Germany and Taiwan makes a careful and comprehensive distinction between the "rat storehouse" behavior and effectively avoids the appearance of the legal black hole, which is worthy of our reference. Based on the analysis of the legislative model of our country, this paper draws the conclusion that it is feasible to establish the crime of financial practitioners' breach of trust. The third chapter mainly analyzes the crime of using unpublished information transaction from the angle of the constitution of crime. "undisclosed information", "making use of the convenience of duty", "violation of regulations" and "express, implied others engaged in relevant transactions" are the entry points for the study of the objective elements of this crime. This article analyzes the subject of the crime from the angle of the scope of the subject and the problem of accomplice. Finally, combined with the problems in practice, the author puts forward the suggestion of adding unit crime and amending the stipulation of "serious circumstances". The fourth chapter is to consider the judicial effectiveness of the "rat bin" crime, mainly to analyze the reasons for the poor judicial effectiveness of the crime of using unpublished information transactions, and from the investigation, The connection mechanism and the legal punishment make some suggestions to improve the judicial effectiveness of rat bin crime.
【學位授予單位】：華東政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.3

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 毛玲玲;破解證券欺詐案舉證難題[J];法人雜志;2004年04期

2 楊高峰;;《刑法修正案(七)》立法的突破與不足[J];法學雜志;2009年06期

3 葉建勛;;關于“老鼠倉”行為入罪的思考[J];法學雜志;2009年09期

4 毛玲玲;;中美證券內幕交易規(guī)制的比較與借鑒[J];法學;2007年07期

5 顧肖榮;陳玲;;必須防范金融刑事立法的過度擴張[J];法學;2011年06期

6 毛玲玲;;近年金融領域刑事司法狀態(tài)的因果[J];法學;2011年06期

7 陳海鷹;朱衛(wèi)明;葉建平;;泄露內幕信息罪、內幕交易罪的若干問題探析——由“杭蕭鋼構案”展開[J];法治研究;2008年03期

8 謝杰;;利用未公開信息交易罪行為對象的刑法分析[J];江蘇警官學院學報;2011年06期

9 王濤;湯琳琳;;利用未公開信息交易罪的認定標準[J];法學;2013年02期

10 顧肖榮;;論我國刑法中的背信類犯罪及其立法完善[J];社會科學;2008年10期

本文編號：1857187