隨著證券交易的普及，以及網際網路發展日新月異，內線交易成為最常見的金融犯罪，各國均致力於防止內線交易之發生，以鞏固其證券交易市場之流通，我國承襲美國法，將內線交易罪制定於證券交易法第157條之1，並於同法第171條規定了刑事責任。 證券交易法的171條規定，犯內線交易罪者，處三年以上十年以下有期徒刑，得併科新臺幣一千萬元以上二億元以下罰金，並以「因犯罪獲取之財物或財產上利益」金額達新臺幣一億元作為分界，若「因犯罪獲取之財物或財產上利益」金額達新臺幣一億元以上者，刑度提高為七年以上有期徒刑，得併科新台幣二千五百萬以上五億元以下罰金。 如此高度的刑度讓筆者不禁懷疑，內線交易罪之惡性是否有高到要用這麼激烈的手段來遏止，且在這樣的重刑下，我國證券交易法防範內線交易罪之規定上是否毫無漏洞、對於被告人權之保障是否完備，均是本文所要探討的。針對上述問題，本文首先分析美國防範內線交易之相關規定及理論，並檢視我國證券交易法之相關規定，輔以著名之「台開案」做為案例，凸顯我國目前證券交易法規定之問題，再於第八章深入探討以重刑化作為手段，是否能達到立法者之目的，最後於第九章提出修法建議。 ;With the growing popularity of securities trading and the rapid development of the Internet, the insider trading becomes the most common financial crime. In order to consolidate the circulation of its securities trading market, the entire world is committed to preventing the occurrence of insider trading. Taiwan inherited U.S. law, put the offence of insider trading into Article 157-1 of the Securities Exchange Act and criminal liability is stipulated in Article 171 of the same law. According to Securities Exchange Act article 171 ：「A person who has committed any of the following offenses shall be punished with imprisonment for not less than three years and not more than ten years, and in addition thereto, a fine of not less than NT$10 million and not more than NT$200 million may be imposed： paragraph 1 or 2 of Article 157-1. 」and Paragraph 2「Where the amount gained by the commission of an offense under the preceding paragraph is NT$100 million or more, a sentence of imprisonment for not less than seven years shall be imposed, and in addition thereto a fine of not less than NT$25 million and not more than NT$500 million may be imposed .」 Such a high degree of punishment allows the writer to wonder if the viciousness of insider trading crime is so high that it must be stopped with such drastic measures. Further, under such severe punishment, whether there is no loophole in Securities Exchange Act to prevent insider trading crime? Whether the protection of the defendant’s human rights is complete? All of this article will explore. Regarding the issues above, this article first analyzes the relevant regulations and theories of preventing insider trading in the United States. And review the relevant provisions of Securities Exchange Act in Taiwan. Taking “Taiwan Land Development Corporation insider trading” for example, to highlight the problems stipulated by the current Securities Exchange Act in Taiwan. Next, the eighth chapter deeply discusses whether the use of heavy penalization as a means can achieve the purpose of legislators. Finally, in the ninth chapter, suggestions for amendments are proposed.
