TRF商品管制與投資人權益之保障：以個案實例分析

Abstract

從連動債風暴，到近期的TRF風暴，顯示我國對於衍生性金融商品的監理仍有相當之進步空間。從2014TRF風暴爆發後，金管會固然因投資人之檢舉始發現弊端，並陸續對金融業做出裁罰及修改相關法規 ，然而風暴並未因此平息，相關銷售仍然持續至2016年，迄今仍有諸多案件紛爭尚未解決。本文從TRF銷售背景出發，詳述TRF商品及其爭議緣起，並分析TRF契約之法律性質，此外，本文亦整理與評論金融監理法規與相關函釋，進而就紛爭處理程序予以介紹並論述， 本文將以實際個案進行分析常見爭議情形，並以相關司法實務見解為出發，對前開爭議進行法律評價，就可能涉及法規爭議、分析，探討銀行違規之法律效果，並提出評論及建議，期待能在健全金融市場穩定與投資人權益保障間取得平衡。 最後提出結論就平衡金融穩定發展及投資人保障權衡出發，就法規修正面、金管會監理實施面及司法與紛爭救濟救濟程序方面等面向提出以下結論與建議。一、專業客戶之認定應著重於交易能力經驗質性評價。二、應明訂銀行違規將致契約無效之法律，以有效降低違規販售之情形。三、金管會應就一次違規銷售行為進行一次處罰(一行為一罰)，取代統包式裁罰(一罪一罰)，以符合比例原則俾達有效管制之成果。四、應養成更多具金融專業調處委員仲裁人、法官協助調處並成立金融專業法庭，以增進爭議處理之能量。五、就其他民事法規體系求償部分，則應考量特別投資人對於銀行確有資訊不對等之情事，而放寬投資人舉證責任標準。

From the storm of structured notes to the recent TRF storm, it shows that Taiwan government still has considerable room for improvement in the supervision of derivative financial products. After the outbreak of the TRF storm in 2014, the financial supervisory commission(FSC) started to make punishment and revised regulations. However, the storm did not calm down. The related sales continued until 2016, and many disputes have not been resolved so far. This article starts from the TRF sales background, details the TRF and its controversy, and analyzes TRF contract and collates the financial regulatory regulations and the relevant administrative rules of the FSC, introduces and makes a brief comment on the dispute handling process. The case-based analysis shows that there are several common drawbacks in TRF sales, and the related drawbacks may involve regulatory disputes and analysis, and explore the legal effects of bank violations. I will take the analysis of the real case and to analyze the common disputes and take the relevant judicial practice opinions as the starting point, and conduct legal analysis and evaluation, which may explore the legal liabilities of bank violations, and to make comments and suggestions. Finally, the conclusions are drawn from the balance of financial stability and investor protection. The following conclusions and recommendations are made on the regulatory amendments, the supervision of FSC, and the dispute resolving procedures. 1. the definition of professional customers should focus on the of trading experience and ability. 2. The law requires that contracts will be invalidated if banks violate the requirements, so as to effectively reduce the likelihood of illegal sales. 3. The FSC shall impose a penalty (one action one penalty) on a non-compliance sale, in order to meet the expectations of effective control. 4. It is necessary to develop more financial professional arbitrators of mediation and judges to assist dispute resolution. 5. In respect of the claims for civil litigation, court should reduce the investors’ burden of proof.