發(fā)布時間：2018-06-07 15:56

  本文選題：私募債券 + 欺詐發(fā)行��； 參考：《人民檢察》2017年05期

【摘要】：私募債券與公募債券在發(fā)行方式、發(fā)行對象、發(fā)行條件、轉(zhuǎn)讓方式等方面存在明顯區(qū)別,信息披露對投資者利益保護(hù)至關(guān)重要。將刑法第一百六十條適用于欺詐發(fā)行私募債券行為,沒有超出該條文的文義范圍,符合設(shè)立該罪名的立法目的。對情節(jié)嚴(yán)重的欺詐發(fā)行私募債券行為,應(yīng)當(dāng)依法追究刑事責(zé)任。同時,應(yīng)充分考慮私募債券發(fā)行的特點,綜合判斷欺詐發(fā)行行為對投資決策者的影響程度和社會危害程度等因素,設(shè)定與欺詐發(fā)行公募債券相區(qū)別的立案追訴標(biāo)準(zhǔn),使對兩者的刑事處罰具有相當(dāng)性。
[Abstract]:There are obvious differences between private bond and public offering bond in the way of issuing, the object of issue, the condition of issue, the way of transfer, and so on. Information disclosure is very important to the protection of investors' interests. The application of Section 160 of the Criminal Code to the fraudulent issuance of private equity bonds does not exceed the scope of the provision and is in line with the legislative purpose of establishing the offence. In case of serious fraud in issuing private equity bonds, criminal liability shall be investigated according to law. At the same time, we should fully consider the characteristics of private equity bond issuance, comprehensively judge the influence of fraudulent issuance behavior on investment decision makers and social harm degree, and set up the standard of filing and prosecution, which is different from fraudulent issuance of public bonds. So that the two criminal penalties are comparable.
【作者單位】： 清華大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【分類號】：D924.3
，

本文編號：1991750