The Liability of Information Delivery in Stock Market─Focus on the News Report of Financial Media and Research of the Professional Securities

摘要 本文從證券市場資訊產製者出發，聚焦財經媒體報導及專業券商所發布的投資研究報告，檢驗內線交易與操縱市場的國內外規制、案例，審視其是否構成證券交易法上的刑事責任，進而歸結解決現今市場亂象之道。 首先，本文區分影響股市的資訊，為硬性資訊及軟性資訊。其中，硬性資訊多以公布後之財務報表為主，呈現出確定、無以更改的數據;軟性資訊則充斥著前瞻性或分析性意見，對於上市公司未來前景提出預測，其中又以財務預測為主。本文嘗試分析財務預測之法理，評價媒體新聞報導或分析師研究報告做出財務預測的責任與限制。 本文切入財經新聞報導或專業投資法人研究報告的訊息產製過程發現，新聞媒體雖有第四權之稱，文本的真實再現，卻夾雜著大量編輯台守門人概念的層層把關，堆積大量意識形態或主觀見解。法人研究報告則植基於硬性資訊之上，再對未來加以預測，外觀上僅揭露予會員或特定投資人，然我國證券市場常態上，研究報告的觀點每每透過傳播媒體，傳達到整體投資市場。美國法上陸續發展出吹噓原則、預先警示原則及安全港條款，都是為了排除作成投資報告的專業法人法律責任而生。 毋寧說資訊是證券市場順利運作的重要動能，正因對資訊的龐大需求，證券市場的資訊產製者應運而生。從汗牛充棟的財經媒體報導到專業券商研究報告，這類深刻影響投資人決策的訊息來源，時有錯漏謬誤，惟我國並無專法規範，充其量以操縱條款中的散布不實資訊加以評價，卻常出現適法問題。反之，若傳遞的資訊正確，而記者或分析師先行買賣，則又有構成內線交易之疑慮。 準此，對於此等行為貿然以刑罰相繩，雖抑制證券市場上之不法性，卻也降低資訊流通之自由度，傷害了證券市場訂價功能。 本文主要聚焦的兩大刑事責任，先梳理內線交易的理論基礎，從美國法的發展脈絡依次介紹資訊平等、信賴關係、私取及消息傳遞理論，並參酌美國及歐盟兩系統立法例，重新建構我國內線交易相關法制及構成要件解釋。再則，從事後角度來看，客觀上未實現的媒體報導或研究報告，與證券交易法第155條第1項第6款之流言或不實資訊，難以區分，能否落入操縱市場之處罰範圍，本文亦提出國內外相關實務案例，俾利建立合理的判斷標準。 針對媒體報導與專業券商研究報告的可罰性界線何在，本文認為鑒於有效率且對稱的訊息傳遞，有助於促進證券市場交投熱絡，吸引國內外企業赴我國掛牌上市，刺激經濟發展。相對地，充滿勸誘性、錯誤性的訊息應該被市場禁絕，諸如前揭外資券商研究報告或新聞報導，若出現虛假訊息或難以立即證明之資訊時，縱無法馬上以證交法相繩，亦應由主管機關要求系爭公司以重大訊息說明真偽，惟有立即性復原不對稱或虛假資訊傾斜狀態，方使能兼顧市場機制而避免寒蟬效應。Abstract This study is aimed to investigate the liability of the information providers in the stock market, and to conclude a solution to avoid the market chaos. This study focuses on the news released from financial media and investment reports offered from stock exchange, and compares the legal practice and cases on the insider trading and market manipulation, especially in the U.S and U.K with Taiwan. In this study, we divide the information that influences the stock market into “hard information” and “soft information”. The former is the precise, not-amended data, and mainly were the official finance reports; while the latter is the prospective predictions, analysis suggestions, and, most of them, the finance projections. We try to analyze the legal principle of financial projections, in order to estimate the media release and analysis reports, and set up a liability and its restriction to the financial projections. Through the research on the process of news-generating, we find it very likely to have a deviation from the truth, which may be caused by subjective or false consciousness from the editors. On the other hand, the institutional investment reports are more likely to be less biased, as they develop forecasts on the basis of solid information. However, they are only disclosed to the members or certain investors. We could easily find that the institutional investment reports are passed on to the investment market from the media. Therefore, Puffery Doctrine, Bespeak Caution Doctrine, and safe harbor provision are developed in U.S. to eliminate the liability to the professional corporations who generate the investment reports. Information is essential for the operation of stock market. Both of professional institutional investment reports and immense number of financial news have an impact on investors’ decision. Currently, there is lack of regulation of false or misleading press release. If the press release is correct, on the contrary, the journalists or analysts, instructing an order, will be involved in the matters of insider- trading. Thus, if the trading is prohibited, it will minimize the chance of illegal insider trading, but it will result in a negative effect on the freedom of information access and market trading. This study propose that information efficiency and symmetry will stimulate economic growth by promoting the stock market and attracting international corporations to list their stock in Taiwan. On the other hand, misleading and false information should be prohibited. If false or not-able-to-be-proof information is revealed in either investment reports or press release, Securities and Exchange Act shall regulate it immediately; or otherwise, a press conference should be called in order to end the false or asymmetric information and avoid chilling effect