金融犯罪近年來日益受學者與實務界之重視,而我國證券交易 法既以「發展國民經濟、保障投資」為目的,證券市場是否依自然 供需法則自由運作,而不受人為操縱行為破壞價格決定機制,顯得 至為重要。 我國證券交易法明文禁止操縱市場行為,違反者除民事損害賠 償責任外,尚有刑事處罰,且刑度非輕。操縱市場雖屬於相對抽象 之一種禁止類型,但法院實務上已經累積為數不少之判決,然而因 案件內容繁雜、法條構成要件不夠明確......等因素,造成法律見解難 以統一之現象,進而使得辯護工作難度增加。 本文擬從比較法上,參考外國法對操縱市場行為禁止之類型及 方式,檢視我國證券交易法中關於操縱市場之立法過程與構成要 件,並蒐集大量法院判決,整理分析被告提出之各式抗辯,回顧法 院判決中之見解、判斷,期待能更深入問題之核心,裨對實務工作 者能有所助益。 / Financial crimes are increasingly valued by academics and practitioners in recent years. Securities and Exchange Act in Taiwan is securities market operate freely in accordance with the law of natural supply and demand without undermining the mechanism of price determination by human manipulation so important. Securities and Exchange Act in Taiwan expressly prohibited for market manipulation and penalize who breach of regulation. They must bear civil liability for damages and seriously criminal penalties. Although market manipulation may be very abstract sometimes, court practice has accumulated a large number of judgments. However, it’s still a big challenge for attorneys due to the different opinions in practice. The relevant provisions of this order the United States, England and China on different types of legislation about manipulation, in order to find the difference of among the Securities and Exchange Law of Taiwan, as a reference to amend acts of manipulation. By studying cases selected our Court and trying to analyze how the various defenses affect the court decision.

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.