近年社會對於內線交易廣泛討論，新聞媒體報導看似內線交易案件量多，實際上內線交易案件量真的如此多嗎？以及內線交易的刑罰有無嚇阻性？本文將透過實證研究方法，從判決書中了解內線交易數量之變化、判刑之輕重、構成要件之審核等等，對比學說上的爭議，探討內線交易所欲規範的圖像以及過往之變革與未來之走向。本文利用實證的研究方法，致力與法條及學說對話，提出假設並加以檢驗，研究後發現，內線交易法之規定在實務上難以獲得彰顯，且其法律規定在效果上亦無顯著效果，而其學說上所認為最具爭議的爭點，在實務判決上影響並非所認為的具影響力，種種現象顯示，我們所認為的內線交易與實際的內線交易狀況有所出入，利用上述成果，期待能更加精確地看待內線交易，對內線交易日後修法能產生部分影響。;In recent years, insider trading has been extensive discussion in the community. Insider trading seemed to frequently appear in the news. But in fact, insider trading really appears so frequently? And whether the punishment of insider trading had deterrence or not? In this article, I will use Empirical Method of Studies to realize some factor of insider trading, like change of quantity, the severity of sentencing, discuss requisite elements, etc., contrasting with the theories, discussing insider trading regulate images and prospecting future. In this paper, I used Empirical Method of Studies, committed to dialogue with the law and doctrine, put forward hypotheses and tested. After the study, it was found that regulate of the Insider Trading were hard to be demonstrated in court, and the legal did not have any significant effect on the effect. Besides, the most controversial issues considered in the doctrine were not considered as substantive judgments Influential. All kinds of phenomena show that we think the insider trading is different from the actual insider trading status. Using the above results, we look forward to a more accurate view of the insider trading and some impact on the aftermath of the insider trading.
