我國興櫃股票之交易方式係由推薦證券商（即興櫃股票之造市商）之報價主導交易進行，屬於報價驅動（Quote-driven）之交易方式，與我國上櫃股票採取「等價交易」及上市股票採取「競價交易」等均屬委託單驅動（Order-driven）之交易方式迥然不同。 按我國證券交易法第155條第2項準用同條第1項規定之適用結果，「於證券商營業處所買賣有價證券」者，仍應有第1項所揭反市場操縱條款之適用。惟有關興櫃股票交易在成交對象之選擇、成交順序、成交價格決定，乃至於成交後之給付結算作業方式等，均與我國現行上市（櫃）股票之交易及交割方式具有明顯之差異，致應如何適用證券交易法反市場操縱條款之規定，乃成疑義。 本文鑒於興櫃股票市場規模已呈穩定成長之勢，不難想像興櫃股票交易與市場操縱行為之間終將有擦出爭議火花之時，故以比較法學研究之觀點，歸納並分析興櫃股票與上市（櫃）股票交易方式之差異及其癥結所在。另蒐集瀏覽世界各國主要證券市場之交易規制，包括美國OTCBB市場、歐陸Alternext市場及英國AIM市場，分析其他採用報價驅動交易模式之先進市場當中有關造市商義務之規範，以掌握造市商義務之核心意涵。進而以造市商義務範圍及報價驅動市場之交易特徵為基礎，逐一檢測興櫃股票適用我國證券交易法所揭「違約不交割」、「相對委託」、「連續交易」、「沖洗買賣」、「散布流言或不實資料」及「其他直接或間接操縱市場」等各款反市場操縱條款規定可能引發之爭議，並提出本文意見。 / The trading mechanism of Taiwan Emerging Stock is based on quote-driven model, which is very different from the order-driven model of the Taiwan OTC securities market and Taiwan Stock Exchange market. By the Taiwan Securities and Exchange Act Article 155 paragraph 2 permitted that paragraph 1, the anti-market manipulation provisions, shall apply mutatis mutandis to securities transactions conducted on the over-the-counter markets. However, lots of Taiwan Emerging stock trading rules such as allowing the participants to choose their counterparty, the matching sequence rules, the price decision rules, and even the rules of payment and settlement practices after transaction, all have significantly differences between those of Taiwan Emerging stock market and listed stock market. Therefore, how should Taiwan Emerging stock apply to the Securities Exchange Act under the terms of the anti-market manipulation is into doubt. Taiwan Emerging stock market has shown a steady growth trend, hence, it is easy to imagine that Taiwan Emerging stock trading and market manipulation issues will eventually rise to controversy. This thesis is to study from the point of view of comparative law, by means of analyzing the emerging stock markets of the advanced countries, including the U.S. OTCBB market, the European Alternext market and the UK AIM market, to conclude the crux of the difference between the quote-driven and order-driven market models. Then, to understand the characteristics and core obligation of the market maker under quote-driven market model, furthermore, to detect the disputes may lead for adapting the anti-manipulation provisions to Taiwan Emerging stock, including the terms of "breach of contract non-deliverable", "improper matched orders ", "continuous trading", "wash sale", "spreading rumors or false information" and other direct or indirect behavior of manipulation". And this thesis proposed its discovery at the end.

由於過度粗糙立法、缺乏相關深入研究暨流於形式之契約解釋取向，臺灣保險契約法第二章第三節特約條款制度實沈苛已深而積重難返，亟待立法者、司法者及主管機關進行大幅度改造。本文研究聚焦於探討該制度－相當於英美保險契約法之明示擔保條款－起源、本質暨新近發展，並研擬相關修法提案俾供後續立法者與研究者參酌。基此，本文擬採用法律經濟分析、實證分析與比較法等研究方式加以進行。從英美法系各國之立法潮流可發現，契約基礎條款因違反合理期待原則而遭多數國家揚棄。此從英格蘭暨蘇格蘭法律委員會目前保險契約法修法暫時提案，以及澳洲1984年保險契約法第24條規定即可窺見一斑。再者，鑑於肯定擔保條款當初建制基礎已消失殆盡，包含英國、澳洲及紐西蘭皆採取以不實陳述制度取代肯定擔保條款之立法，俾以達成較為公平之規範結果。至於允諾擔保條款部分，增加損失與違反行為間因果關係要件實已蔚為潮流，包含英國、美國數州、澳洲及紐西蘭相關立法皆為適例。此外，相較於無效、得撤銷抑或自動向後免責，賦予保險人契約終止權誠屬較佳之法律效果，已獲各國之共識。職是之故，本文主張應修改特約條款有關肯定特約部分相關文字，使同法第64條據實說明制度可取代之，俾產生較有效率之核保資訊提供制度。另一方面，允諾擔保條款內容應限縮於與危險有關之重要性事項。此外，應考慮增加損失與違反行為間因果關係要件，並使保險人於無因果關係之情形得以主張就系爭損失免責。鑑於解除權易使法律關係趨於複雜，本文建議應以契約終止權取代現行契約解除權較佳。又在前述修法前，法院得透過契約解釋方式緩和現行法弊端，而行政院金融監督管理委員會亦得透過保險商品審查機制過濾不妥之約款加以因應。 / Express warranties of insurance law in Taiwan provoke a great number of dilemmas in both theory and practice due to oversimplified legislation, a paucity of related studies and formalism of contract construction. This study aims not only at exploring the origin, nature and development of the institution for the purpose of elucidating pros and cons of express warranties, but also at providing an amendment to express warranties of insurance law in Taiwan. The dissertation achieves the dual goals by way of comparative study and economic analysis of law. Obviously, abolition of “basis of the contract clause”－an obsolete and bitterly-criticized contract term－ has been an uncontroversial trend around the world on the grounds of reasonable expectations. English and Scottish Law Commissions’ tentative proposals, as well as Section 24 of Australian Insurance Contracts Act 1984, sets an excellent example. Also, with an eye to the collapse of affirmative warranties’ keystones, several countries, including the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand, substitute misrepresentation for affirmative warranties for the purpose of leveling the playing field. As for promissory warranties, requirement of causal link between losses and breach of promissory warranties has gained a dominant position in the U.K., the U.S., Australia, and New Zealand on the grounds that considerable unfairness to policyholders would arise in the absence of it. In addition, the insurers’ right to terminate contracts has been generally regarded as a more superior legal effect than III rendering contracts void or avoid, even the insurer automatically discharged from liability. Based upon these foreign legislation and other considerations, the dissertation proposes the third section “express warranties” of insurance law in Taiwan should be amended thoroughly. Affirmative warranties in the section should be substantially supersede by misrepresentation set forth in article 64, since the latter is capable of inducing the insured to provide necessary information for the insurer in a more efficient way than is the former. On the other hand, promissory warranties of insurance law in Taiwan should be reconstructed by adding the requirement of causal connection to the insurer’s right not liable for specific losses. Furthermore, this dissertation also advocates that legislators replace the insurer’s right to avoid with the right to terminate on the basis of evading complicated legal relationship. Besides, in advance of amending aforementioned articles, the dissertation suggests that courts in Taiwan mitigate harsh effects via contract construction, and regulators should filter inappropriate or nominal warranties from insurance policies by means of administrative screening mechanism.