請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/92559
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 汪信君 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.advisor | Hsin-Chun Wang | en |
dc.contributor.author | 侯怡秀 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author | Yi-Hsiu Hou | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-04-12T16:14:59Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-04-13 | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2024-04-12 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2024 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2024-03-27 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | 一、 中文部分
(一)專書 林國全、王志誠、卓俊雄、汪信君、莊永丞、林建智(2019),《金融消費者保護法:理論與實務》,元照。 財團法人保險事業發展中心(2007),《投資型保險商品》,修訂3版,自刊。 財團法人保險事業發展中心(2012),《風險管理與保險規劃》,修訂2版,自刊。 (二)書之篇章 林育廷(2011),〈理財顧問與業務員之區辨與規範〉,《保險法學之前瞻—林勳發教授六秩華誕祝壽論文集》,頁381-424,元照。 (三)期刊論文 王志誠(2011),〈金融行銷之控制及法制變革:金融消費者保護法之適用及解釋〉,《萬國法律》,179期,頁2-10。 杜怡靜(2009),〈金融商品交易上關於說明義務之理論與實務上之運用——對連動債紛爭之省思〉,《月旦民商法雜誌》,26期,頁50-66。 杜怡靜(2010),〈投資型保險商品關於說明義務與適合性原則之運用——台北地院九十六年度保險簡上字第六號及台北地院九十七年度再易字第一號判決〉,《月旦民商法雜誌》,27期,頁130-141。 杜怡靜(2019),〈關於金融消費者保護法中「適合性原則」之再反思〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,287期,頁22-42。 汪信君(2020),〈金融市場之揭露義務與適合度規範:由行為經濟學之視角論保險商品〉,《臺大法學論叢》,49卷3期,頁1063-1120。 張冠群(2014),〈投資保險保險人說明義務之內容與履行方法/臺高院101保險上易8判決〉,《台灣法學雜誌》,252期,頁203-211。 陳洸岳(2011),〈金融消費者保護法下業者損害賠償責任初探〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,199期,頁5-25。 陳肇鴻(2011),〈由比較法觀點論金融機構之適當性義務〉,《軍法專刊》,57卷2期,頁75-98。 陳肇鴻(2012),〈連動債糾紛之司法實踐——2009年至2010年間相關判決之研究〉,《中研院法學期刊》,10期,頁161-223。 陳肇鴻(2017),〈重思金融消費者保護之管制手段〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,266期,頁156-164。 葉啟洲(2013),〈臺灣保險消費者之資訊權保護——以金融消費者保護法之說明義務規範為中心〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,214期,頁46-68。 葉啟洲(2017),〈保險消費者資訊權保障之現在與未來〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,263期,頁56-77。 蔡昌憲、廖沿臻(2015),〈論我國金融消費者保護法之說明義務及適合度規定-以日本法為參考〉,《東海大學法學研究》,46期,頁1-60。 (四)網路資料 ETtoday新聞雲(07/25/2021),〈金融業遭客訴破萬件!4年快速倍增 一表揭密「常見爭議」有哪些〉,https://www.ettoday.net/news/20210725/2035839.htm。 鏡週刊(05/27/2022),〈【投資型年金險1】又一樁!76歲爺爺買投資型年金險2年虧掉台幣千萬元〉,https://www.mirrormedia.mg/story/20220526money001/。 三立新聞網(08/01/2022),〈周渝民買投資型保單遭詐!專家籲「魔鬼費用」高達150%〉,https://www.setn.com/News.aspx?NewsID=1154894。 聯合報(08/13/2022),〈保險業務員運用話術勸誘買保單,銀髮族受害多!專家:3種情況怕兩頭空,投資面臨風險,要考慮還款能力〉,https://health.udn.com/health/story/10429/6533895?from=udnamp-referralnews_ch1005artbottom。 鏡週刊(09/07/2022),〈【理財專題】裹著月配息糖衣的毒藥 台灣獨有類全委保單崩壞〉,https://www.mirrormedia.mg/story/20220905money002/。 經濟日報(12/12/2022),〈保險避雷針/90歲老太太年繳620萬元保費,銀行被逮到2點瑕疵要賠錢〉,https://money.udn.com/money/story/122377/6833378。 二、 英文部分 (一)專書 FRIEDMAN, MILTON (2002), CAPITALISM AND FREEDOM. OGUS, ANTHONY (2004), REGULATION: LEGAL FORM AND ECONOMIC THEORY. (二)期刊論文 Anderson, S. C. & Winslow, D. (1992), Defining Suitability, 81(1) KENTUCKY LAW JOURNAL 105. Bettman, J. R., & Kakkar, P. (1977), Effects of Information Presentation Format on Consumer Information Acquisition Strategies, 3(4) JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH 233. Black, J. et al. (2007), Making Success of Principles-based Regulation, 1(3) LAW AND FINANCIAL MARKETS REVIEW 191. Blank, R. P. et al. (1974), Variable Life Insurance and the Federal Securities Laws, 60(1) VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW 71. Fishman, G. L. (1966), Broker-Dealer Obligations to Customers--The NASD Suitability Rule, 51(2) MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW 233. Fletcher, C. (1988), Sophisticated Investors Under the Federal Securities Laws, 1988(6) DUKE LAW JOURNAL 1081. Gedicks, F. (2005), Suitability Claims and Purchases of Unrecommended Securities: An Agency Theory of Broker-Dealer Liability, 37(2) ARIZONA STATE LAW JOURNAL 535. Howells, G. (2005), The Potential and Limits of Consumer Empowerment by Information, 32(3) JOURNAL OF LAW AND SOCIETY 349. Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1989), The Effect of Task Demands and Graphical Format on Information Processing Strategies, 35(3) MANAGEMENT SCIENCE 285. Kozup, J. et al. (2008), The Effects of Summary Information on Consumer Perceptions of Mutual Fund Characteristics, 42(1) THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS 37. Loss, L. (1948), The SEC and the Broker-Dealer, 1(4) VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW 516. Lowenfels, L. D. & Bromberg, A. R. (1999), Suitability in Securities Transactions, 54(4) BUSINESS LAWYER (ABA) 1557. Markham, J. W. (2021), Regulating Broker-Dealer Investment Recommendations - Laying the Groundwork for the next Financial Crisis, 13(2) DREXEL LAW REVIEW 377. Miller, G. A. (1956), The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information, 63(2) THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW 81. Nichols, F. (1977), The Broker's Duty to His Customer under Evolving Federal Fiduciary and Suitability Standards, 26(3) BUFFALO LAW REVIEW 435. Poser, N. S. (2001), Liability of Broker-Dealers for Unsuitable Recommendations to Institutional Investors, 2001(4) BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 1493. Rapp, R. N. (1998), Rethinking Risky Investments for That Little Old Lady: A Realistic Role for Modern Portfolio Theory in Assessing Suitability Obligations of Stockbrokers, 24(2) OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 189. Reinsch, R. W. et al. (2004), Trust Your Broker: Suitability, Modern Portfolio Theory, and Expert Witnesses, 17(2) ST. THOMAS LAW REVIEW 173. Richmond, D. R. (2005), Liability Issues in the Sale of Life Insurance, 40(3) TORT TRIAL & INSURANCE PRACTICE LAW JOURNAL 877. Schwarcz, D. (2014), Transparency Opaque: Understanding the Lack of Transparency in Insurance Consumer Protection, 61(2) UCLA LAW REVIEW 394. Tarbert, H. P. (2019-2020), Rules for Principles and Principles for Rules: Tools for Crafting Sound Financial Regulation, 10 HARVARD BUSINESS LAW REVIEW ONLINE 1. Wallace, B. H. (2006), A Proposal to Refine the Suitability Standard by Quantifying Recommendation Risk and Client Appropriate Risk Level, 1(1) BROOKLYN JOURNAL OF CORPORATE, FINANCIAL & COMMERCIAL LAW 231. Wirth, R. J. (2002), My Customer's Keeper: The Search for a Universal Suitability Standard in the Sale of Life Insurance, 24(1) WESTERN NEW ENGLAND LAW REVIEW 47. (三)網路資料及其他 Additional Guidance on FINRA's New Suitability Rule, FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY (May 18, 2012), https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/12-25. Dispute Resolution Statistics, FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY (2023), https://www.finra.org/arbitration-mediation/dispute-resolution-statistics. FINRA Amends Its Suitability, Non-Cash Compensation and Capital Acquisition Broker (CAB) Rules in Response to Regulation Best Interest, FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY (June 19, 2020), https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/20-18. NASD Regulation Reminds Members and Associated Persons That Sales of Variable Contracts Are Subject to NASD Suitability Requirements, FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY (Dec. 1, 1996), https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/96-86. New Implementation Date for and Additional Guidance on the Consolidated FINRA Rules Governing Know-Your-Customer and Suitability Obligations, FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY (May 18, 2011), https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/11-25. SEC Approves Consolidated FINRA Rules Governing Know-Your-Customer and Suitability Obligations, FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY (Jan. 10, 2011), https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/11-02. STAFF OF THE U.S. SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, STUDY ON INVESTMENT ADVISERS AND BROKER-DEALERS AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 913 OF THE DODD-FRANK WALL STREET REFORM AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT (2011). Suitability Rule and Online Communications, FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY (March 18, 2001), https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/01-23. The NASD Reminds Members of Their Responsibilities Regarding the Sales of Variable Annuities, FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY (May 1, 1999), https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/99-35. The NASD Reminds Members of Their Responsibilities Regarding The Sale Of Variable Life Insurance, FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY, https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/00-44. Waddell, Melanie, SEC's Clayton Explains 'Best Interest' vs. 'Fiduciary' Duty, THINK ADVISOR (June 6, 2019, 4:42 PM), https://www.thinkadvisor.com/2019/06/06/secs-clayton-explains-best-interest-vs-fiduciary-duty/. | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/92559 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 有鑑於投資型保險銷售爭議不斷,本文回顧我國金融消費者保護法下適合度、說明義務等規定適用情形。首先就適合度規定而言,本文在立法層面強調採原則導向規範之重要性,並指出應如何與銷售投資型保險適用之法規命令相互配套,以及指出在法院實務層面應貫徹立法精神,對於個案進行實質審查;接著,就說明義務而言,本文在立法層面亦指出履行說明義務方式原則上不應予以限制,但對於例外情形,像是銷售對象為高齡消費者,則須考量口頭說明之必要性,最後,本文亦指出說明義務與適合度規定得相輔相成,即得以適合個別消費者屬性之方式為有效的資訊揭露。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | In light of the ongoing controversies in relation to the sales of variable contracts, this thesis examines the application of the suitability rule and the disclosure obligation regulated in the Financial Consumer Protection Act in Taiwan. Firstly, concerning the suitability requirement, this thesis raises the importance of principle-based regulation from the legislative aspect. It delineates how the Act should be harmonized with other existing regulations governing the sale of variable contracts. It also suggests that the courts conduct substantial review in individual cases in accordance with the suitability requirement, thus aligning with the legislative intent. Secondly, regarding the disclosure obligation, this thesis also emphasizes that for exceptional circumstances, such as selling variable contracts to elderly consumers, the necessity of oral explanations must be considered. Lastly, the thesis proposes that to improve the efficacy of disclosure regulations and to ensure better comprehension of information by financial consumers, the disclosed content should be personalized to accommodate the individual attributes of consumers. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2024-04-12T16:14:59Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2024-04-12T16:14:59Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝辭 I
中文摘要 II ABSTARACT III 目次 IV 表次 VII 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機與目的 1 第二節 研究範圍 3 第三節 研究方法與限制 3 第四節 研究架構 4 第二章 投資型保險之常見銷售爭議 6 第一節 投資型保險概論 6 第一項 投資型保險之定義與定性 6 第二項 投資型保險之特性 7 第三項 投資型保險之種類 8 第二節 常見銷售爭議 10 第一項 誤導保本或誇大投資收益 11 第二項 以投資商品外觀銷售 12 第三項 未口頭告知危險保費 13 第四項 勸誘解舊買新 14 第五項 勸誘以保單借款或房屋貸款等融資方式投保 16 第六項 建議或推薦不適合商品 17 第七項 濫行KYC作業 18 第三節 小結 19 第三章 我國法 21 第一節 責任主體 21 第一項 金融服務業之定義 22 第二項 保險公司、保險經理人、保險代理人責任 22 第三項 銀行保險業務 24 第二節 適合度義務 25 第一項 適合度相關規範與內涵 26 第二項 學說回顧 32 第三項 實務案例研析 34 第三節 說明義務 72 第一項 理論基礎 72 第二項 說明義務規範與內涵 73 第三項 實務案例研析 82 第四節 小結 97 第四章 美國法 99 第一節 適合性原則 99 第一項 自律機構之適合性相關規範 100 第二項 聯邦行政機關建構之適合性義務 112 第三項 消費者之事後救濟 121 第四項 小結 127 第二節 適用於投資型保險之資訊揭露規範 129 第一項 聯邦證券法律 129 第二項 NAIC模範法 139 第三項 小結 141 第五章 我國適合度義務與說明義務之檢討與重構 143 第一節 適合度義務內涵再建構 143 第一項 貫徹原則導向之立法精神 143 第二項 具體化適合度義務內涵:以銷售投資型保險為例 144 第二節 說明義務與一般書面資訊揭露規範之區隔 148 第一項 說明方法 148 第二項 說明程度 151 第三項 說明範圍 152 第三節 適合度義務與說明義務之交界 153 第六章 結論 156 參考文獻 160 | - |
dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
dc.title | 金融消費者保護法下適合度義務與說明義務之重構——以投資型保險銷售爭議為例 | zh_TW |
dc.title | The Reconstruction of the Suitability Rule and the Duty of Disclosure under the Financial Consumer Protection Act: Taking Variable Contracts as an Example | en |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.date.schoolyear | 112-2 | - |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 楊岳平;李志峰 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Yueh-Ping Yang;Chih-Feng Li | en |
dc.subject.keyword | 金融消費者保護,適合度,說明義務,資訊揭露制度,投資型保險, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Financial Consumer Protection,Suitability Rule,Duty of Disclosure,Information Disclosure,Variable Contract, | en |
dc.relation.page | 165 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202400818 | - |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | - |
dc.date.accepted | 2024-03-27 | - |
dc.contributor.author-college | 法律學院 | - |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 法律學系 | - |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-112-2.pdf 授權僅限NTU校內IP使用(校園外請利用VPN校外連線服務) | 2.43 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。