資訊揭露不實之民事責任—以證券交易法第20條之1為探討核心

Abstract

資訊揭露為證券市場中重要的行為態樣，其良窳優劣，影響所及除了投資人外，長遠而言與全體市場參與者息息相關，更與市場之健全休戚與共。本文於第二章，追溯「資訊揭露」此一價值之緣由，並更進一步分就「主體」、「資訊」、「責任」三部分，定義資訊揭露不實之意義，限縮範圍至發行市場與次級市場之比較，且進一步帶出相關爭議與現行實務操作。 第三章就主體的部分，延伸討論至「發行人」之主觀要件，現行法課予無過失責任，固係本於保障投資之立場，然而觀照第20條之一、第32條分係針對次級市場與初級市場之特性而設，發行人於兩市場中俱負無過失責任之規定，正當性即有所不足，另參照外國立法例之趨勢，亦難以尋得正當性基礎，是以，本文認為，就次級市場中的資訊不實，發行人負責之主觀要件，應以推定過失為宜。 第四章則由「資訊」的角度切入，藉「重大性」判斷標準之功能、範圍之探討，返求其定義。本文認為，若將公司所產生之資訊性質區分為屬財務報告與非財務報告者兩類，重大性判斷標準之適用範圍，應限於非財務報告一類，蓋屬於財務報告者，因與理性投資人追求利益之本質相涉，本屬重大資訊而毋庸再藉重大性判斷標準判斷之。再者，延續理性投資人之觀點，重大性判斷標準之定義應保有彈性，然非謂審判時就此要件之闡述得以未置一詞。 第五章就責任之部分，針對第20條之1之實體法規定，結合訴訟上之狀況，深入探討比例責任與連帶責任的關係。本文認為，連帶責任之規定於存在複數被告時係予原告訴訟上之便利，增訂比例責任後，亦不改連帶責任所具之對內與對外之本質，是以，複數被告間，即便故意者對外負全部責任，對內仍有其應負之責任比例，法院於訴訟上應予處理。至於比例責任之認定，因具體就行為人對損害之貢獻度為斷；另若有和解產生，本文認為和解的結果應僅存於和解當事人之間，不應造成其他未和解被告之不利，故和解的情形，原告之總損害應以扣除應分擔額為宜。 第六章則總結前述討論，並提出第20條之1的修法建議。

There are hundreds and thousands of information has been produced in securities market everyday, the way of the information to be relieved, called “disclosure”, is one of the most important topics in securities market. When it comes to disclosure, there are different aspects to consider from different market participators, but it’s undoubtedly that dig down this topic, information is the root that derives all the pressing issues including misrepresentation. Misrepresentation is forbidden by Taiwanese Securities and Exchanged Act, there are countless explanations and judgments in practice, but still, there are numerous issues unsolved yet. The main purpose of this thesis is to examine the pressing issue about misrepresentation, especially the one has been existed in Secondary Market. In chapter 2, this thesised start from tracing the value of “disclosure” in securities market, to unfold three related issues— Who, what and how. After deciding who are supposed to disclose the information, in chapter 3, the thesis further discussed that a more reasonable stipulation for issuer to take the responsibility in misrepresentation situation, is to modify the subjective element from absolute liability to negligence presumed. In chapter 4, the thesis attempted to calculate the standard of materiality by recognizing the function and range of the concept, and consider that the characteristic of information could generally be classified into financial related and non-financial related, moreover, the latter one is the main object for materiality standard to apply. Subsequently, the thesis discussed about liability in chapter 5, focusing on the relationship between proportionate liability and joint and several liability, and conclude that it’s necessary to figure out how much proportions for each defendants in trail, even for the one who is proved to be intended for misrepresentation. Beside, when plaintiff and defendants had settled, the amount of compensation which plaintiff claimed for should deduct the proportion that settled defendants are supposed to pay. Finally, the thesis made a conclusion and proposed a reform vision of Article 20-1 in chapter 6.